Tag Archives: Eligibility

EEA Nationals Introduction / Overview

The position of EEA nationals is special. They do not require leave to enter the UK  because they have an enforceable Community right of admission. Section 7(1) of the Immigration Act 1988 and Regulation 11 of the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006 SI No.1003 which grants an automatic right of admission on production of a valid national identity card or passport.
Whether an EEA national is a person subject to immigration control depends on  whether they are exercising an enforceable European Community right (Immigration Act 1988, s.7(1)), i.e. whether they have a right to reside. Their right to reside derives mainly from Directive 2004/38/EC ("the Directive"). This has been given domestic effect in the UK by the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006 SI No. 1003. However, advisors should check the Directive and the regulations on problematic cases because they are not identical.
An EEA national not exercising a right of residence has no right to remain in the UK and, accordingly, requires leave to remain. These EEA nationals are persons subject to immigration control: see Abdi & Ismail v Barnet LBC [2006] EWCA Civ 383, [2006] HLR 23, 6 April 2006.
In all cases, where an EEA national has a right of residence he/she will not be a person subject to immigration control.

There are 3 classes of right to reside provided by the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006:

Initial right of residence pursuant to Regulation 13 not exceeding 3 months, valid identification card or passport, must not become an unreasonable burden on the social assistance system of the UK;
Extended right of residence, pursuant to Regulation 14 - available only to qualified persons;
Permanent right of residence pursuant to Regulation 15 - principally available to EEA nationals who have resided in the UK in accordance with the Regulations for a continuous period of 5 years and to workers/self-employed persons who have ceased activity.

Persons Not Subject to Immigration Control

Persons not subject to immigration control divide into two groups.

Group 1
The first group is those who do not require leave to remain enter or remain in the UK and comprises
(a) British citizens
(b) Commonwealth Citizens with the right of abode
(c) EEA nationals who are exercising Treaty rights

Group 2
The second group is those who are except from the requirement to have leave to enter or remain in the UK. The groups contains three main classes
(a) diplomats and certain staff of embassies and high commissions and their families who form part of their household.
(b) members of the UK armed forces, members of a commonwealth or similar force undergoing training in the UK at the invitation of the government.
(c) members of the crew of a ship or aircraft, hired or under orders to depart as part of that ship's crew or to depart on the same or another aircraft within seven days of arrival in the UK

Provision of Information About Immigration Status

Section 187 of the Housing Act 1996 places a duty on the secretary of state to provide a local authority with such information as they may require to enable them to determine whether a person is eligible for assistance under Part 7 of the Housing Act 1996.

Details of how to obtain this information is set out in Annex 8 of the Homelessness Code of Guidance 

Persons Subject To Immigration Control But Prescribed Eligible

Most persons subject to immigration control are not eligible. However, there are 5 classes of such persons who are expressly made eligible (or "re-included") by order of the Secretary of State.
The 5 classes of persons who are subject to immigration control but eligible, are set out in the Allocation of Housing and Homelessness  (Eligibility) (England) Regulations  2006 SI No.1294.  Regulation 5 sets out the persons subject to immigration control who are eligible as homeless persons under Part VII of the Act.
Class A - Refugees within the definition in the Refugee Convention article 1 who have leave to enter or remain in the UK, i.e. successful asylum seekers.
Class B - a person who has been granted exceptional leave to enter or remain in the UK outside the provisions of the immigration rules, whose leave is not subject to a condition requiring him to maintain and accommodate himself (and any person  dependent on him) without recourse to public funds.
Exceptional leave to enter or remain in the UK was abolished from 1 April 2003. It used to describe leave granted to asylum seekers who were not found to be refugees but who the Home Office, for humanitarian or compassionate reasons, determined that it would not be right to return to their county of origin. Since discretionary leave is also a form of leave granted outside the immigration rules it may also come within the ambit of Class B
[This may need to be updated now that all decisions are treated as being made within the rules]
 
Class C - a person who has current leave to enter or remain which is not subject to any limitation or condition and who is habitually resident in the UK, the Channel  Islands, the Isle of Man and the Republic of Ireland other than a person:
(i) who has been given leave to enter or remain upon an undertaking given by another person (his sponsor) to be responsible for his maintenance and accommodation;
(ii) who has been resident in the UK for less than five years beginning on the date of entry or the date on which the undertaking was given in  respect of him, whichever is the later; and
(iii) whose sponsor or, where there is more than one sponsor, at least one of whose sponsors, is still alive.
Class D -a person who has Humanitarian Protection granted under the Immigration Rules.
Introduced 1 April 2003.  Humanitarian Protection is leave granted to a person who, if removed, would face a serious risk to life or person arising from capital punishment, unlawful killing or torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment in the country of return. While they do not satisfy the criteria laid down in Article 1 (A)2 of the Refugee Convention, they would be at risk of treatment in violation of Article 2 or Article 3 of the ECHR.
Even if a person is able to establish that there is a real risk of a breach of his human rights, he will not be granted Humanitarian Protection if he comes within various exclusion criteria. These include those whose presence in the UK is considered not to be conducive to the public good and/or they are considered a threat to security. Those who would have been granted humanitarian protection but are subject to the exclusion criteria are normally granted a limited period of discretionary leave to remain. Where the risk of treatment in violation of Article 3 arises owing to a medical condition Humanitarian Protection is not given but the person will be considered for Discretionary Leave instead.
Class E - a person who is an asylum-seeker whose claim for asylum is recorded by the Secretary of State as having been made before 3 April 200o within the circumstances mentioned in one of the following paragraphs -
(a) on arrival  (other than on his re-entry) in the United Kingston from a country outside the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man or the Republic of Ireland;
(b) within three months from the day on which the Secretary of State made a relevant declaration, and the applicant was in Great Britain on the day on which the declaration was made; or
(c) on or before 4th February 1996 by an applicant who was on that date entitled to benefit under regulation 7A of the Housing Benefit (General)Regulations 1987 (persons from abroad).
For the purposes of Class E, asylum seeker means a person who is at least 18 years old, who is in the UK and who has made a claim for asylum. A claim for asylum means a claim that it would be contrary to the UK's obligations under the Refugee Convention for the claimant to be removed from, or required to   leave, the UK. A person ceases to be an asylum-seeker when his claim for asylum is recorded by the Secretary of State as having been decided (other than on appeal) or abandoned.
A relevant declaration means a declaration to the effect that the country of which the applicant is a national is subject to such a fundamental change of circumstances that the secretary of state would not normally order the return of a person to that country. The only claims for asylum currently affected are those by Sierra Leone nationals from 16 May to 16 August 1997, and those made by Democratic Republic of Congo nationals between 1 July and 1 October 1997.
The significance of 3 April 2000 is that a person who claimed asylum on arrival in the UK, on or after that date was no longer supported by local authorities but by the National Asylum Support Service ("NASS"). In July 2006 the Home Office announced that NASS no longer existed as a separate department. Asylum support is now administered by two separate routes. Those who made their first asylum claim on or after 5 March 2007 have their support processed under the New Asylum Model ("NAM") case owner who is processing their asylum claim. Applicants who claimed asylum before 5 March 2007, known as legacy cases, should have their asylum and support claims dealt with by the Casework Resolution Directorate ("CRD).
Applicants who come within Class E are not automatically eligible for assistance. Section 186 of the Housing Act 1996 states that such a person or his dependant is not eligible if he has any accommodation in the UK, however temporary, available for his accommodation.
For the purposes of this section a person becomes an asylum seeker at the time when his claim is recorded by the secretary of state as having been made and ceases to be an asylum seeker when is claim is recorded as having been finally determined or abandoned.
A dependent means a spouse or child under 18 and becomes such when the secretary of state records him as being a dependent of the asylum seeker and ceases to be a dependent wen the claimant ceases to be an asylum seeker, or, if earlier when he is recorded by the secretary of state as ceasing to be a dependent. The section defines a claim for asylum as one made pursuant to the Refugee Convention.
Class F - a person who is habitually resident in the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands, the Isle of Man or the Republic of Ireland and who has limited leave to enter the UK as a relevant Afghan Citizen under paragraph 276BA1 of the Immigration Rules. This class was introduced by the Allocation of Housing and Homelessness (Eligibility) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2014 SI No 435 regulation 2 with effect from 31 March 2014. It applies to certain Afghan citizens who were locally employed by the UK government in Afghanistan and have since been granted limited leave to remain in the UK.

Lekpo-Bozua v Hackney LBC [2010] EWCA Civ 909

Summary 
The council owed the claimant the main housing duty under Housing Act 1996 Part 7 (homelessness) because she lived with a dependant child. But the council proposed to discharge the duty by arranging a private sector assured shorthold tenancy (rather than social housing) because the child was an EU national with no right to reside in the UK and therefore a 'restricted person' under the 1996 Act (as amended). The judge dismissed an appeal from that decision. The Court of Appeal gave permission for a second appeal. The grounds of appeal asserting that the 'restricted person' scheme discriminated on grounds of nationality - contrary to human rights legislation - and that the child was in any event exercising EU treaty rights raised issues of importance that justified a full appeal hearing.

Full Report

EEA Nationals

Overview
The position of EEA nationals is special. They do not require leave to enter the UK  because they have an enforceable Community right of admission. Section 7(1) of the Immigration Act 1988 and Regulation 11 of the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006 SI No.1003 which grants an automatic right of admission on production of a valid national identity card or passport.
Whether an EEA national is a person subject to immigration control depends on  whether they are exercising an enforceable European Community right (Immigration Act 1988, s.7(1)), i.e. whether they have a right to reside. Their right to reside derives mainly from Directive 2004/38/EC ("the Directive"). This has been given domestic effect in the UK by the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006 SI No. 1003. However, advisors should check the Directive and the regulations on problematic cases because they are not identical.
An EEA national not exercising a right of residence has no right to remain in the UK and, accordingly, requires leave to remain. These EEA nationals are persons subject to immigration control: see Abdi & Ismail v Barnet LBC [2006] EWCA Civ 383, [2006] HLR 23, 6 April 2006.
In all cases, where an EEA national has a right of residence he/she will not be a person subject to immigration control.
There are 3 classes of right to reside provided by the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006:
 
The Initial Right to Reside
EEA nationals holding this right are expressly excluded from housing assistance and made ineligible by the AHH(E)(E) Regulations .
Extended Right to Reside
Most applications from EEA nationals will centre upon the extended right of residence and whether the applicants are qualified persons. The Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006 make detailed provision for the entry into the UK of EEA nationals. Regulation 14 confers on qualified persons the right to reside in the UK without any requirement for leave to do so under immigration law. Regulation 6 defines a qualified person as :
Retention of the Right to Reside
Under I(EEA) 2006, Regulation 10, a family member of a qualified person retains the right to reside in certain circumstances connected to a change in the family circumstances:
  • Death of qualified person - the family member (who is not an EEA national)  must have resided in the UK in accordance with the regulations for at least the year immediately preceding the death of the qualified person AND if he were an EEA national would be a worker, a self-employed person or a self-sufficient person: Regulation 10(2) & (6);
  • Children in school - children in education retain the right of residence after  the death or departure from the UK of the EU citizen who was a qualified person. The child must have been attending an educational course in the UK immediately before the qualified person died or ceased to be a qualified person on ceasing to reside in the UK and must continue to attend such a  course: Regulation 10(3).
  • Parent of children in school - the parent or adult (irrespective of their nationality) who has 'actual custody' of the children in school also retains the right to reside to enable the children to remain in the educational institution until they have finished their studies: Regulation 10(4);
  • Divorce etc - in certain circumstances a family member will retain the right to reside where the marriage is ended by divorce or annulment or the civil partnership is terminated. Where they are not an EEA national, they must be  a worker, a self-employed person or a self-sufficient person. The conditions  under Regulation 10(5) include residence in the UK in accordance with the regulations at the date of the termination and either that:
  • the marriage or civil partnership lasted for 3 years prior to the initiation of the termination proceedings and the parties had resided in the UKfor at least 1 year during its duration; or
  • the former spouse/civil partner of the qualified person has custody of a child of the qualified person; or
  • the former spouse/civil partner of the qualified person has the right of access to a child of the qualified person under 18 years old and a court has ordered that access must take place in the UK; or
  • there have been particularly difficult circumstances warranting the continued right of residence, for example, domestic violence.
European Economic Area Nationals and The Right To Reside Family members
A Family member is defined in the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006, reg 7 as:
  • spouse or civil partner;
  • direct descendants including those of a spouse or civil partner who are:
  •       under 21; or
  • their dependants
  • dependent direct relatives in the ascending line including those of a spouse or civil partner; or
  • "extended family members" who have been issued with an EEA family permit, a registration certificate or a residence card and who satisfy the conditions in Regulation 8.
In PG v VG [2007] UKAIT 19, it was held that "direct" is not confined to the first generation but can include grandchildren, but not nieces, nephews, uncles or aunts. This approach was followed in Bigia & others v Entry Clearnace Officer [2009] EWCA Civ 79, at para [4].
Dependant in this context means that the family member needs the material support of the EEA national or his or her spouse in order to meet their essential  needs in the country of origin: see Jia v Migrationsverket, Case C-1/05. Proof to establish material support may be adduced by any appropriate means and is not confined to financial dependency. In Pedro v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2009] EWCA Civ 1358, the Court of Appeal held that the Directive did not specify when the dependency had arisen, nor did it require that the relative had to be  dependent in the country of origin. It was sufficient if the dependency arose in the host Member State.
In Metock & others v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law reform, Case Claimant- 127/08, the ECJ decided that the national law of Ireland was inconsistent with the Directive on the free movement of Union citizens insofar as it only permitted nationals of non-Member States to join family members in Ireland if those nationals had previously been resident in another Member State. Nothing in the Directive made its application conditional upon the applicant family member of a Union citizen having previously resided in a Member State. The definition of family    member was not distinguished according to whether or not they had already lawfully resided in another Member State. It followed that the Directive had to be interpreted as applying to all nationals of non-Member States who were family members of a Union citizen, irrespective of where they had resided prior to their arrival. The Directive conferred upon such family members the right to join the Union citizen in the host Member State whether he had become established there before or after founding a family; either way a refusal by the host Member State to grant them a right of residence was equally liable to discourage that Union citizenfrom exercising his or her rights of residence. Limiting the application of the Directive solely to the family members of a Union citizen who "accompanied" or "joined" him was equivalent to limiting the rights of entry and residence of family members of a Union citizen to the Member State in which that citizen resided.
On 2 June 2011 the Immigration (EEA) (Amendemt) Regulations 2011, SI No. 1247, amended the Immigration (EEA) Regulations 2006 to reflect the Metock decision.
Extended Family Members
Extended family members, are those other than spouses/civil partners, direct descendants (either under 21 or dependent) or dependent direct relatives in the acscending line. They are defined by I(EEA) 2006, reg 8, as:
  • a relative of an EEA national or his spouse or civil partner, who is  dependent on the EEA national or is a member of his household, and who resides with or wishes to reside with the EEA national;
  • a relative of an EEA national or his spouse or civil partner, who 'strictly' requires their personal care on serious health grounds;
  • a relative of an EEA national who would meet the requirements for indefinite leave to enter or remain in the UK as a dependent relative of the EEA national if the EEA national were treated as a person present and settled in the UK;
  • a partner of an EEA national (other than a civil partner) who can prove that he is in a durable relationship with the EEA national.
Special provision is made by I(EEA)2006, reg 7(2) for family members of a student. A person is not a family member if he is a direct descendant or dependent relative in the ascending line after three months after the student has been admitted to the UK unless:
  • the person is the dependent child of the student, or her spouse or civil  partner; or
  • the student is also a qualified person under one of the other categories.
The rights of family members of EEA nationals are also set out in the I(EEA) Regulations 2006. Family members who are EEA nationals will in any event have the right of admission and the initial right to reside, but these rights are also given to family members who are not EEA nationals: Regulations 11(2) & 13(2). Further, whatever their nationality, family members will also be entitled to the extended right to reside for so long as they are the family member of a qualified person or a person with a permanent right to reside: Regulation 14 (2). A permanent right to reside is given whether there is continuous residence as a family member "in accordance with the regulations" for 5 years or where they are the family member of a worker or self-employed person who has ceased activity or, in certain circumstances, has died: Regulation 15.
The  Permanent Right To Reside After Five Years
EEA nationals who have resided in the UK for a continuous period of five years obtain the right permanently to reside in the UK  pursuant to  I (EEA) Regulation 15 2006. Family members who are not EEA nationals but have resided with an EEA national for a continuous period of five years also obtain the right.
Workers or self-employed persons who have ceased employment (and their family members) also acquire a permanent right of residence. A person who was a family member of a worker or self-employed person has a permanent right to reside if:
• the worker or self-employed person has died;
• the family member resided with him immediately before his death; and
• the worker or self-employed person had resided continuously in the UK for at least the two years immediately before his death or the death was the result of an accident at work or an occupational disease.
The nature of the permanent right to reside has been the subject of several recent decisions of the ECJ. In Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Taous Lassal & CPAG, C-162/09, it was recognised that the permanent right to reside contained in Article 16 of the Directive did not appear in previous legislation. However, continuous periods of five years' residence completed before the Directive came into force on 30 April 2006, and in accordance with the earlier legislation, must be taken into account for the purposes of the acquisition of the right of permanent residence under Art.16. Absences fro the host Member State of less than two consecutive years which occurred before 30 April 2006, but after a continous period of five years' legal residence completed before that date, do not affect the acquisition of the right of permanent residence pursuant to Art.16.
The decision was followed by the ECJ decision in Secretary of State for Work and Pensions v Maria Dias, C-325/09 in July 2011. Time spent in the UK by Ms Dias when she had no right to reside but was in possession of a residence permit granted by the national authorities, did not constitute legal residence and therefore could not count towards the five years required for permanent residence under Art. 16 of the Directive. However, it may still be possible to argue that the holder of a valid residence permit is entitled to social assistance: see R (Bidar) v LB of Ealing and Secretary of State for Education and Skills, Case C-209/03 at [37], and Trojani v Centre Public d'Aide Sociale de Bruxelles (CPAS), Case C-456/02 at [43]-[46].
Also relevant is McCarthy v Secretary of State for Home Department, Case C-434/09. Mrs McCarthy held dual British and Irish nationality. She was born and had always lived in England where she married a Jamaican national who lacked leave to remain in the UK. The couple applied for but were refused residence permits as an EU citizen and the spouse of an EU citizen. The ECJ considered that all Union citizens who "move to" or reside in a Member State "other" than that of which they were nationals were beneficiaries of the Directive. However, the Directive could not apply to a Union citizen who enjoyed an unconditional right of residence due to the fact that he resided in the Member State of which he was a national. The residence to which the Directive referred was linked to the exercise of the freedom of movement of persons. The territorial scope of the right of residence and the right of permanent residence referred to the Member State to which a Union citizen "moves" in order to exercise their right of free movement. As Mrs McCarthy had never exercised her right of free movement and had always resided in the Member State of which she was a national, she was not covered by the concept of "beneficiary" for the purposes of Art.3(1) of the Directive. Accordingly, art.3(1) was to be interpreted as  meaning that the Directive was not applicable to a Union citizen who had never exercised his right of free movement, who had always resided in a Member State of which he was a national even if they were also a national of another Member State (see paras 32-43 of judgment).

Other Souces of A Right To Reside

1. Families of Nationals of Member States Whose Children Are In Education or Training
In recent years case law has established a right for children of a national of a Member State who is or has been employed in the territory of another Member State is to be admitted to that State's general educational, apprenticeship and vocational training courses on the same conditions as nationals of that State, if the child is residing in its territory. This is based on  Article 12 of Regulation (EEC) No. 1612/68 which provides for equal access for children to the education systems of member states. This right can give rise to a right to reside for the parent or carer of the child until they are 18 or stop eduction or training. This applies to a parent or who is not an European National themselves. The argument is that the child cannot enjoy their right to education under Article 12 if the person who cares from them i prevented from caring for them by being denied accommodation and benefits.
The main cases concerning this right are
  • Harrow LBC and  SSHD v. Ibrahim (2010) A Somali parent was entitled to housing and benefits even though she was separated from the European workder parent and he had now left the county.
  • Teixeira v. Lambeth LBC (2010) A European parent was entitled to housing even though she was not working because he had worked in the past and her daughter was in school.
  • Secretary of State for Work and Pensons v JS (instructing solicitor) [2010]  The right to reside as the primary carer of a child in  education who is the child of a migrant worker can apply to an A8 national, even where he had not completed 12 months work pursuant to the worker registration scheme. The Upper Tribunal judge gave a useful summary:

2. Non European Parents Entitled to Reside Where Their Child is a European National

The argument here is that Article 20 of the TFEU  provides a number of rights to reside for its citizens but these cannot be enjoyed by a child if his or her parents are prevented from caring for him or her.
The main cases concerning this right are:-

The Habitual Residence Test

Summary
If a person is not from abroad they should be entitled to be treated as eligible for housing and benefits but they may still be excluded as a result of the Habitual Residence Test
The law here is messy. In summary a person should have no trouble passing this test if they can show that they have been living in the UK for more than two years before they made their application. A person living in the UK for more than six months should also be alright but where local authorities want to be difficult persons including British citizens who have been away from the county for more than a few months and have not been back for more than six months may experience difficulties.
A person who fails the habitual residence test should reapply for housing or benefits on a regular basis as each their claim to be habitually resident gets stronger with the passing time and cannot be denied after six months.
Provided the person does not fail the habitual residence test they should be eligible for all housing and benefits which they otherwise qualify for and should not be treated as ineligible.
Detail
The test of habitual residence applies to all nationals who are persons from abroad and are not subjection to immigration control, including British nationals. The test focuses on the fact and nature of residence. Mere physical presence is insufficient: there needs to be an association between the individual and the place of residence. The most important factors are the length, continuity and general nature of the actual residence.
It is necessary to distinguish between applicants who have arrived in the UK for the first time and those returning to the UK to resume a previous habitual residence.
First Time Resident
Annexe 10 of The Homelessness Code of Guidance recommends that applicants who have been resident continuously for a 2 year period prior to their housing application will be habitually resident: (paragraph  9.15). But inquiries need to be conducted where an applicant has less than 2 year's continuous residence. Consideration should be given to why the applicant has come to the UK, whether he is joining friends/family here, what his plans are, his length of residence in another country and where his centre of interest is located which includes factors such as the location of an applicant's home, his family ties, club memberships and finance accounts): see Annex 10 to the Code.
The two significant factors are:
  • residence for an appreciable period of time such that it has become habitual and will or is likely to continue to be habitual. This can be a short time - see Nessa v Chief Adjudication Officer [1999] 4 All ER 677 at 682-83; and R(Paul-Coker) v. Southwark LBC [2006] HLR 32
  • A settled intention to reside - common reasons for choice of a regular abode are education, business or profession, employment, health, family or mere  love of the place (see the speech of Lord Scarman at 235H-G, in Shah v Barnet [1983] 1 All ER 226). 
In CIS 4474/2003, a benefits appeal, the Commissioner stated that in the general run of cases, the period will lie between one and three months for habitual residence to be acquired.
Resumption of residence 
Where an applicant is returning to the UK after a period spent abroad and it is established that the applicant was previously habitually resident AND he has a settled intention to return, then the applicant has no obligation to satisfy a further period of residence in the UK and will be immediately  habitually resident. But there has to be a genuine resumption of the previous habitual residence. - See Annexe 10 of the Homelessness Code of Guidance 
Relevant factors include length of absence from the UK and continuing links during the absence. Inquiries include when, how long and why did the applicant leave the UK, what links were maintained with the UK whilst they were away (eg. accommodation/family), what was the purpose of their time abroad and why did the applicant return to the UK.
Regulation 6(2): exemptions from the Habitual Residence Test &  Re-Inclusions as Eligible 
 
As set out above, Regulation 6(1)(a) of the Allocation Regulations provides that a  person from abroad (who is not a person subject to immigration control) is not eligible if they are not habitually resident.
However, regulation 6(2) provides specific exemptions from the habitual residence requirement in 6(1)(a). It identifies 7 categories of persons who will be eligible notwithstanding the fact that they do not have habitual residence.

The Eligibility Decision Process

The decision to be made is: Is the applicant a person from abroad who is ineligible?
This involves the following issues:
Question 1. Is the applicant a person from abroad? If the answer is no then subject to the habitual residence test they are likely to will be eligible and you can jump to Question 4
If the answer is yes, the next question is:
Question 2. Is the applicant a person subject to immigration control?
If the applicant is a person subject to immigration control, the next question is:
Question 3. Does the applicant fall into Classes A-E of regs. 3 & 5 of the 2006 Allocation Regulations?' If yes, then eligible. If no, ineligible.
If the applicant is not a person subject to immigration control, the next question is:
Question 4. Is the applicant habitually resident? If yes, then eligible (unless an EEA jobseeker or exercising the initial 3 month right to reside). If no, the next question is:
Question 5. Does the applicant fall within the list of 9 re-inclusions exempt from the habitual residence requirement in regs. 4 & 6 of the 2006 Allocation Regulations? If yes, then eligible. If no, ineligible.