18.67.1Ahmad v Secretary of State for the Health Department [2014] EWCA Civ 988, [2015] 1 WLR 593
An EEA national’s entitled to NHS treatment does not qualify as the possession of ‘comprehensive sickness insurance’, needed to qualify for permanent residence
Facts: Mr Ahmad, a Pakistani national, entered the UK lawfully to joint his wife, an EEA student. His entitled to remain after three months, and thereafter permanently, depended on his wife having comprehensive sickness insurance: see Article 7 of the Council Directive 2004/38/EC (‘the Citizen’s Directive’). Mr Ahmad claimed that his wife’s entitlement to NHS care was tantamount to having comprehensive sickness insurance.
Judgment: the Court of Appeal (Arden, Beatson and Sharp LJJ) held that the provisions of Article 7 of the Citizen’s Directive conferred an important privilege, permanent residence, and therefore were to be construed strictly, such that ‘comprehensive sickness insurance’ did not include the public healthcare system of the host state:
70. I would dismiss this appeal. If an EEA national enters the UK and is not involved in an economically active activity, for example because she is a student, her residence and that of her family members will not be lawful unless she has CSIC while she is a student in the five years following her arrival. Accordingly her family members will not be able to qualify for permanent residency in the UK.
71. So Mrs Ahmad had to have CSIC while she was a student. This condition must be strictly complied with. The fact that she would be entitled to treatment under the NHS, and was thus at all times in substantially the same position as she would have been had she had CSIC, is nothing to the point. Her failure to take out CSIC put the host state at risk of having to pay for healthcare at a time when the Ahmads had not then achieved the status of permanent resident and she was not economically active.