CELEX: 62020CA0247
Language: en
Date: 2022-03-10 00:00:00
Title: Case C-247/20: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 10 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Social Security Appeal Tribunal (Northern Ireland) — United Kingdom) — VI v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States — Article 21 TFEU — Directive 2004/38/EC — Article 7(1)(b) and Article 16 — Child who is a national of a Member State staying in another Member State — Right of residence derived from the parent who is the primary carer of that child — Requirement of comprehensive sickness insurance cover — Child having a permanent right of residence for part of the periods concerned)

25.4.2022   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 171/7
            
         
      Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 10 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Social Security Appeal Tribunal (Northern Ireland) — United Kingdom) — VI v The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
      (Case C-247/20) (1)
      
      (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States - Article 21 TFEU - Directive 2004/38/EC - Article 7(1)(b) and Article 16 - Child who is a national of a Member State staying in another Member State - Right of residence derived from the parent who is the primary carer of that child - Requirement of comprehensive sickness insurance cover - Child having a permanent right of residence for part of the periods concerned)
      (2022/C 171/09)
      Language of the case: English
      
         Referring court
      
      Social Security Appeal Tribunal (Northern Ireland)
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Applicant: VI
      
         Defendant: The Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs
      
         Operative part of the judgment
      
      
                  1.
               
               
                  Article 21 TFEU and Article 16(1) of Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC must be interpreted as meaning that neither a child, a Union citizen, who has acquired a right of permanent residence, nor the parent who is the primary carer of that child is required to have comprehensive sickness insurance cover, within the meaning of Article 7(1)(b) of that directive, in order to retain their right of residence in the host State;
               
            
                  2.
               
               
                  Article 21 TFEU and Article 7(1)(b) of Directive 2004/38 must be interpreted as meaning that, as regards periods before a child, a Union citizen, has acquired a right of permanent residence in the host State, both that child, where a right of residence is claimed for him or her on the basis of that Article 7(1)(b), and the parent who is the primary carer of that child must have comprehensive sickness insurance cover within the meaning of that directive.
               
            
         (1)  OJ C 313, 21.9.2020.