Court rules Somali woman has right to housing

26 February 2010 | By Isabel Hardman

A court has ruled a Somali woman is entitled to a council house and other state benefits, even if she is a ‘burden on the state’.

Nimco Hassan Ibrahim, who has children in UK schools, was told on Tuesday she has a right to a council house in Harrow, even though she has no right of residence in the UK under EU law.

EU judges in Luxembourg ruled parents caring for the children of migrant workers and resident in EU countries are covered under EU rules on freedom of movement, including those who cannot support themselves.

Ms Ibrahim moved to England to join her Danish husband – named in court as Mr Yusuf – in 2003. Mr Yusuf’s nationality meant he qualified as a ‘migrant worker’ from another EU country, with EU residency rights, which applied to his wife.

But in 2004, Mr Yusuf left the country while his wife remained. The court said Ms Ibrahim was ‘never self-sufficient, and depends entirely on social assistance’.

Harrow council initially turned down her application for housing assistance on the grounds that only people with a right of residence under EU law could apply. Ms Ibrahim appealed against this decision.

Tuesday’s judgement said: ‘A parent caring for the child of a migrant worker who is in education in the host member state has a right of residence in that state.

‘That right is not conditional on the parent having sufficient resources not to become a burden on the social assistance system.’

The Home Office is studying the potential wider impact of the judgement. Harrow council said it was a potential ‘floodgates judgement’.

Councillor Barry Macleod-Cullinane said: ‘We are very concerned with this outcome, as it appears to establish a major new legal precedent over benefit claims.

‘Harrow council is studying the full implications of the ruling, but it could well prove to be a floodgates judgement in that people who have not yet contributed to this country or who do not have the means to sustain themselves can now seek immediate help from state welfare services.’

Readers' comments (14)

Joe Halewood | 26/02/2010 3:00 pm
Anyone got a reference for the judgment?
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Editor's comments
Hi Joe, you can find the judgement here, under Ibrahim http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/form.pl?lang=en&jurcdj=jurcdj&newform=newform&docj=docj&docop=docop&docnoj=docnoj&typeord=ALLTYP&numaff=&ddatefs=19&mdatefs=2&ydatefs=2010&ddatefe=26&mdatefe=2&ydatefe=2010&nomusuel=&domaine=&mots=&resmax=100&Submit=Rechercher
Junior | 27/02/2010 1:05 am
Let the bloody EU judges in Luxembourg pay the bloody bill of this lady. What have we gone mad and look how many people we have out of work in this country. Well come on my fine Judges in Luxembourg open up your wallets and big deep.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Melvin Bone | 01/03/2010 8:26 am
Whilst Ibrahim v Harrow will have an impact on benefit for Persons From Abroad and is obviousley a dream for the press as she is Somalian and has a big TV.

Teixeira v Lambeth (which should also be reported but an EU national is less newsworthy...)will in fact have further reaching consequences in reality as it involves an EU national.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
John Braine | 01/03/2010 11:35 am
I think that this ruling means that Mrs Ibrahim does in fact have a right of residence after all. The judgement said that, ‘a parent caring for the child of a migrant worker who is in education in the host member state has a right of residence in that state.' The fact that she is caring for the children of her absent Danish husband puts her in that category.

Harrow Council needs to study the judgement but should avoid all fluvial references including floodgates or for that matter to the river Tiber however much they would like to.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Jack Davies | 01/03/2010 1:17 pm
The use of Somali and the use of 'floodgates' only deflects the issues down the road or crass racism.

For example, if the mother had been Swiss (ie non EU) and her EU husband had been French would the same furore and red-top media headline have been different? It would and the issues of fact would be then discussed.

Or if a Swiss wife had been left by her English husbdand with four kids and no funding in France would we be ranting about such issues, I doubt it.

The issue here is 4 EU nationals (the children) one of which is born in UK, being abandoned or left by the Danish husband. The council have now been told they must ensure the childrens needs are met under EU law by making the non-EU mother eligible for housing as she is the principle carer for these children, one of whom is English.

I dont know if the council referred this housing matter to social services for a child in need assessment or a National Assistance Act 'assessment' or whether they took the view that youre not eligible for housing or recourse to public funds so go away. Is the latter what we want councils to do? I hope not!

And blaming the EU for this is not on either. The UK government helped frame the documents and its wording which would also help a UK citizen if they were abandoned in a EU country because of relationship breakdown too - its far too simple to say we want it to help UK citizens but not foreigners.

The decision appears eminently right and sensible
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Peter | 01/03/2010 3:02 pm
Well articulated Jack.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Melvin Bone | 02/03/2010 8:44 am
For a more detailed view on BOTH Ibrahim v Harrow & Teixeira v Lambeth try this link:

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/reports/article7041166.ece

BOTH cases are relevant. Its pointless to just focus on Ibrahim v Harrow.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
john bull | 04/03/2010 9:27 pm
outrageous. the sooner we leave the EU the better, or change it back to EEC a trading group only, which is all we the British people, voted for.

I hate to say it but is anybody taking bets on how many BNP will be elected as MP's at the next election. Then just imagine a hung parliament with the balance held by their ten or twenty MP's.
I wonder if the big parties will then start listening to what the British people want, and actually doing somthing.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Joe Halewood | 05/03/2010 11:18 am
Usually racist and anti-EU sentiment again I see.

The misguided simpletons who think you can have a trading partnership with the free movement of goods, capital and services but without the free movement of peoples are naive. They also tend to forget that the Tories under Heath took us in and that Thatcher guillotined the four freedoms above in the 1986 SEA - the free movement of peoples (both ways of course for all the ex-pats living a higher standard and qualityof living in Spain etc that all vote Tory) was passed without any vote or discussion by the great EU hater!

The myopic John Bulls have no problem receiving taxes from Johnny Foreigner working here but go ballistic if they receive benefits - a racist naive view if ever there was one!

And it is such naive rants from these Little Englanders that present opportunities for BNP abject racists to gain influence

Then again the hypocrisy is seen with those same Little Englanders who love this country so much they donate over £5m to their beloved Tory party whilst maintaining non-dom tax status - dont pay UK taxes so you can donate to a UK party in return for a peerage in simple terms. How patriotic!! - Then again if patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel as Wilde said ....
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Melvin Bone | 05/03/2010 12:07 pm
Joe Halewood | Fri, 5 Mar 2010 11:18 GMT
'Usually racist and anti-EU sentiment again I see. '

How can you define my post as racist? I'll take the anti-EU accusation as I disagree with the judgements but fail to find any racist angle...

This article is about Ibrahim v Harrow but fails to mention Teixeira v Lambeth whos' judgement was released the same day. Nimco Hassan Ibrahim is not an EU national at all, but her children technically children of a migrant worker. This is not about race but nationality and the immigration/worker status of an individual.

Teixeira v Lambeth is much more relevant yet not discussed at all...
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment