In Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council [2010] UKUT 243, a Polish national who was receiving an invalidity pension from Sweden was held to have comprehensive sickness cover by virtue of Regulation 1408/71, now Regulation 883/04, because these provisions allowed the UK to claim back the cost of her NHS care from Sweden, however she did not have sufficient resources, taking into account her housing needs and the fact that her stay in the UK was intended to be permanent.
In SSWP v. SW UKUT 508the Upper Tribunal stated that a person could be self sufficient by virtue of being entitled to treatment under the National Health Service by virtue of satisfying the residence and presence conditions under domestic law.
However in Ahmad v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] 1 W.L.R. 593the Court of Appeal heldthat the right to a permanent residence card was a privilege which was not conferred unless there was strict and literal compliance with the conditions therein; that, therefore, “comprehensive sickness insurance cover” did not include the public healthcare system of the host state; and that, accordingly, where an EEA national entered the United Kingdom and was not involved in an economically active activity, her residence and that of her family members would not be lawful, if either wished to stay longer than three months, unless she had comprehensive sickness insurance cover while she was economically inactive in the five years following her arrival, and her family members would <not, therefore, qualify for permanent residency in the United Kingdom.