Mr Emad Case

The purpose of the free movement of persons within the Union is to meet the demand of labor and professional shortage in other member states.

Article 20(1,2) TFEU defines and establishes some rights of the citizen of the Union. Any citizen of a member state will automatically hold the citizenship of the European Union. Article 20(2) TFEU provides rights to be exercised by all citizens of the Member states, including right to move freely around the European Union and settle anywhere within its territory. The free movement has been confirmed in article 21(1) TFEU and has been supplemented with limitations and conditions which have been laid down by the Treaties.

As per article 20 TFEU, Sidney qualifies as a EU citizen, the case of Grzelczyk support this position.

Articles 4 and 5 of the Directive give the EU citizen the right of entering or exiting any MS, without a visa.

Article 6(1) of the Directive gives the EU citizen and the family member the right to reside up to three months without any conditions

However, if any EU citizen can engage in an economic activity in another MS, such as a worker or a self-employed, article 7 Directive lays down the conditions, which gives the EU citizen rights to reside more than three months in a host MS.

The Treaties have laid down rights of free movement or residence for worker under article 45 TFEU, for establishment article 49 TFEU and for proving service under article 56 TFEU.

From the stated above, all these applies to Sidney.

Q2

If someone falls within the definition of a family member, than he or she will be able to exercise the right of free movement of person of an EU citizen. As long as the EU citizen is exercising his right Iorio .

For residency, article 7(2) of the Directive gives the family member, as non-union citizen the right to reside with the EU citizen in the host MS.

In Surinder case the right of free movement as a family member of an EU citizen was used against her own state.

By referring to Surinder , Sidney is entitled to use his right by article 1(b) and 7(2) of the Directive to bring his father to the UK.

In regards to Mr Michio, the definition of a family member has been explained in article 2 of the Directive.

d) 'The dependent direct relatives in ascending line and those of the spouse or partner as defined in point (b).'

In Lebon the ECJ explained the meaning of dependant.

Dependency does not need to be financially, it can be an act, for instance arranging of a care.

If there is any evidence to suggest that Mr Michio dependant on Sidney, than article 2(d) applies.

However, article 3(2)(a) gives more opportunity to other family members to accompany the Union citizen, if they are: 'dependants or, member of the household or, serious health grounds and requires care by the EU citizen' .

So, if Mr Michio can prove that he is a member of the household, he may be granted an entry visa, than he has the right to exercise the right of free movement and the right to work under article 23 of the Directive in the UK.

Regarding to derogate, from the statement has been given,

General rule is the host MS cannot stop or terminate the right of free movement, or residence to any EU citizen or their family member R v Pieck .

However, there are some exceptions, if they have caused or will cause a danger to public policy, or public security or public health to the host MS. Then the MS has the power to restrict the right of free movement, furthermore, the Directive gives general principles in article 27 .

There is no evidence that Mr. Michio creates a threat to public or security or health policy. He may 'become unreasonable burden on the social assistance system of the host MS', if he could not find a job in the future, but that is unlikely when he speaks English well.

Q3

If an EU citizen wishes to stay in another MS more than three months, article 7 Directive explains the conditions.

Estonia is a member of the EU (article 20 TFEU), so therefore Tanya has the right of free movement as an Estonian citizen (article 21(1) TFEU) Baumbast.

Article 49 TFEU 'Freedom of establishment' gives the individual citizen right to move and settle in any MS, for continues economic activity to set a business up as self-employed, for a long-term or permanently, under the law and the conditions that have been laid down by the host MS. In Gebhard a German lawyer moved to Italy to set up a law firm, the court held that 'he is not providing service, but he is established' .

Tanya is allowed to set up a business as self-employed in the UK, as long she follows the national law of self-employment and her activity is genuine and effective.

If an EU citizen wishes to stay in another MS more than three months, article 7 of the Directive states the conditions, one of these conditions is

a) The Union citizen should be occupied in an economic activity such as been worker or established as self-employed in the host MS

As work-seeker, in Antonissen the ECJ held: the applicant is allowed being in the host MS 'for six month seeking for job, however, the six months period is only guideline' . UK was is not allowed to deport the applicant if he can prove that he is continuing seeking