Readers might remember the case of LB Harrow v Ibrahim and another  EWCA Civ 386 (noted by us here) where the Court of Appeal referred three questions to the ECJ concerning the rights of residents of family members of former Community workers.
The Advocate General (Mr Mazak) has now delivered his opinion in the case, which is available here. The Advocate General is not a Judge of the ECJ nor is his view binding on the Judges although, in practice, the ECJ usually follows the advice given. We will, therefore, have to wait for the final decision, but, for what it is worth, he has concluded:
(a) children of EU citizens who have installed themselves in a member state during the exercise by their parents of rights as residence as workers in that state are entitled to reside in the state in order to attend general educational courses;
(b) a parent who is the primary carer of those children – irrespective of his or her nationality – is entitled to reside with the children in order to allow the children to exercise that right. The fact that the parent who is a citizen of the EU is no longer working in that state and has left the state is irrelevant;
(c) it is similarly irrelevant that the children and their primary carer are not self-sufficient and are dependent on social assistance;
(d) the length of time that the children have been enrolled in their educational courses is also irrelevant.
Incidentally, counsel’s advice to Harrow on the then prospective Court of Appeal proceedings in this case is available online as part of memo here [link to .doc] and google web version here. It really is amazing what Google can find!