Second Home Visas Unconstitutional
26th Jan 2024
The French Constitutional Council has ruled that the proposed exemption of British second home owners from normal visa requirements to be unconstitutional.
To read the article you can take out a premium subscription for €20/YEAR at Subscribe to France Insider.
You can see the full list of our articles at France Insider News.
If you no longer wish to hear from us simply unsubscribe using the link below.
Enjoy your reading,
The Team at France Insider
Second Home Visas Unconstitutional
26th Jan 2024
The French Constitutional Council has ruled the proposed exemption of British second home owners from normal visa requirements is unconstitutional.
&
As we reported in a recent article, the new Loi Immigration included a clause granting an automatic right to a long-stay visa to British second-home owners.
However, all new laws in France need to be validated by the Constitutional Council.
The proposed law was hotly contested, and subject to a substantial range of amendments introduced during the parliamentary proceedings.
One of these amendments, proposed by a group of senators in the Upper House, was a new clause granting British second-home owners an 'automatic' right to a long-stay visa.
The 'Sages' of the CC rejected the clause, considering it nothing to do with the main objectives of the proposed law, even in an indirect manner, stating: "Introduced at first reading, these provisions aim to modify the specific conditions of stay in France for certain British nationals. These provisions therefore have no link, even indirect, with .... the initial bill. They also do not present a link, even indirect, with any other of the provisions which appeared in the bill submitted to the Senate."
The CC reserved opinion on whether the substantive aspects of the clause were constitutional, ruling it unconstitutional on the procedural grounds of being a 'cavalier législatif' (legislative rider).
It is difficult to see how the clause can now be resurrected on a future occasion in the current parliament, as there are no obvious legislative openings available and the government does not support it.
Even were an opening to be found, the text could still be rejected on substantive grounds.
When the clause was considered by the legal committee of the National Assembly it was rejected on the basis that: "Nothing justifies this exemption, British citizens made a sovereign choice to leave the European Union and renounce the advantages that come with it. The simple fact of owning a second property is not sufficient grounds to justify exemption from visa requirements.”
Second-home owners outside of the EU wishing to stay longer in France (Europe) than 90 days in any 180 days will need to make application each year for a short-stay visa.
Steve Jolly, from the France Visa Free campaign group, stated in response to the announcement that: "I am understandably disappointed by the decision of the Constitutional Council. It is though not surprising. Legal experts had alerted us to the possibility. However, I am heartened by the fact that our concerns over the visa process and mobility arrangements between France and the UK were heard. France is now aware that there are problems and that these need answers."
A further 35 of the 86 clauses in the law were rejected by the CC, most for also being legislative riders that had nothing to do with the main objectives of the original bill.
Other clauses ruled invalid included national quotas, deposits by students, access to social benefits, and toughening of the rules on residence permits for family members.