Primary Carer of a Child in Education - EEA National

Morning All - Please could I have your input of the following hypothetical situation.

EEA National “Miss W” from Poland, has lived in the UK with her three children (ages 5, 10, 17) for 2 years.  She split from her polish partner (who was both not her husband nor biological father of her children) in November 2014 due to issues of domestic violence.

Miss W has no work history in the UK as previously relied on her partners income. From October onwards the tenant made a claim for JSA and as a new EEA worker seeker, was granted 6 months entitlement only, with no HB. 

It now seems likely that Miss W may secure 16 hours a week employment on a 6 - 12 month contract. Which is a step in the right direction for her future, however it raises two questions, is it likely that this work period would be considered Genuine and Effective employment?

Secondly if she came out of work when the contract ended, as a primary carer of children in education who would then have her own work history - would she have a derived right of residence under article 10 and have an underlying access to benefits?

I only seem to find conflicting information whether the carer must have worked either prior to / at the start of / during the childrens education. Thanks in advance!

All that is required is a common period in which the child is living in the country and one of its parents is a worker there.  As soon as that has happened, the child’s right to go to school from that point onwards has been established, with the primary carer having a derivative right as long as their presence is required.

So if this claimant establishes herself in effective and genuine work (which it sounds like she will), her child will have the right to remain in education thereafter.

That is great news and as I suspected. Many thanks for your reply.

Hi there, as a follow up to the above post, fortunately Miss W did manage to secure employment 16 hours a week, her new contract started 4 weeks ago and she is being paid weekly.

However at present, Miss W has been given a doctors note for 3 weeks due to health issues, her employers are currently paying her and maintaining her work contract -  but we are currently under the assumption this will only last for upto a further 2 months plus we are unsure what the likelihood of Miss W returning to work are.

Looking at a worst case scenario, if she were to finish work completely, based on her work period of just 4 weeks (and possible two further months of employer sick pay) , would this be sufficient to establish a “genuine and effective” work period common with her children being in school? i.e. then be able to claim a derived right to reside as a primary carer of a child in school?

I am thinking along the lines of Barry v Southwark 2 weeks work at Wimbledon…

Any thoughts would be appreciated!

As long as she gets a covering sick note from a Dr, even when she stops being paid by her employer she still keeps her worker status, and yes, the 4 weeks she has been employed is enough to satisfy the requirements.