tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8704899696538705849.post7182540969588854437..comments2024-03-28T02:32:17.979-07:00Comments on EU Law Analysis: ‘You have children together but your marriage is fake’: Marriages of convenience, UK courts and EU free movement lawSteve Peershttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05869161329197244113noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8704899696538705849.post-43926758837863139542023-07-09T03:41:13.621-07:002023-07-09T03:41:13.621-07:00I disagree with the author's portrayal of UK a...I disagree with the author's portrayal of UK authorities' concerns about marriages of convenience as a result of Euroscepticism. The tightening of rules around such marriages is a legitimate measure to ensure the integrity of immigration laws. The analysis of UK case-law seems to overlook the need to address abuse and protect the rights of genuine couples, both EU and non-EU nationals, from potential exploitation and fraud.Omar Abdullahhttps://noblemarriage.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8704899696538705849.post-63943510676818838402021-12-11T03:08:00.930-08:002021-12-11T03:08:00.930-08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Bamboo Events Planning & Decorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12231150937305630403noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8704899696538705849.post-37927190229381128052021-06-12T07:39:43.204-07:002021-06-12T07:39:43.204-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Mr. Seohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03545886416361258655noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8704899696538705849.post-22825719953428744242021-06-10T00:52:11.145-07:002021-06-10T00:52:11.145-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Garden City Resorthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00684235981176313200noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8704899696538705849.post-90880098271272543782021-05-18T19:27:31.099-07:002021-05-18T19:27:31.099-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Jessica L. Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13408448099656902268noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8704899696538705849.post-325140512849301032021-01-24T14:01:53.206-08:002021-01-24T14:01:53.206-08:00Thank you very much for your comment. This is cert...Thank you very much for your comment. This is certainly true for at least some of the cases. The main problem, however, is that many judges tend to give little weight to the evidence suggesting that the parties have obviously been in a relationship and focus on alleged discrepancies and other perceived signs of abuse instead. The ‘sole purpose’ test under EU law is a very high threshold to meet. It is for the executive and judges to justify why a non-EU family member can be refused residence in the UK, not the other way round. I have seen cases where applicants had supplied many pages of extra (and solid) evidence in rebuttal of that provided by the Home Office, but to no avail. Cases involving children are particularly illustrative in this respect. In my view, the very fact of pregnancy and/or childbirth alone signifies that the spouses, at least at some point, have been in a relationship, which is inconsistent with the narrow definition of marriages of convenience under the Citizenship Directive. Accepting that the applicant is a caring and loving parent of his child yet still finding his marriage to be one of convenience is problematic to say at least.Aleksandra Jolkinanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8704899696538705849.post-6732823802583088522021-01-23T01:58:27.162-08:002021-01-23T01:58:27.162-08:00Thank you for providing us good reading for the we...Thank you for providing us good reading for the weekend.<br /><br />I have a question on burden of proof.<br /><br />On the basis of the materials and the analysis available, can you rule out the possibility that the judges are not merely stating that tjey were giving a last chance for the applicants to provide evidence in rebuttal against the evidence provided by the authorities - which would otherwise suffice to establish the conveniential nature of the marrage?<br /><br />That would not sound extraordinary in circumstances where the judges need to take into account a very large number of evidence differing in nature and credibility in an area of law, where one can at best provide only "indirect" proof of the normatively relevant facts.<br /><br />That would also seem to quarantee the applicants with enhanced legal protection in comparison to the kudges simply stating that the authorities have provided with sufficient evidence. Period.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com