supplementary work benefit from the German authorities
Claude, who is a French national, and his spouse Sarah (an Algerian national) recently entered Germany. Claude became employed on a building site for a few hours a week. He applied for a supplementary work benefit from the German authorities but was told that as a non-German national he was not entitled to claim it.
Sarah, who had already passed German language exams applied for an office job. The employer stated he could only consider non German applicants who held a German Language Proficiency Certificate. Sarah did not have this certificate and was refused a job. She argued that her German qualifications should have been accepted. The employer replied that German law required non-national applicants to have this certificate.
Jacques (who is also a French national and a friend of Claude) entered Germany. He speaks very little German and has no qualifications. He told Claude that he has come to Germany to claim the generous social security benefits and that he does not intend to look for work. He registered for benefits saying he was going to look for a job.
Claude and Sarah have two children, Michelle (aged 18) and Louis (aged 12). Claude applied for a tax allowance available in Germany to families of two or more children. He was told that this allowance is available to German nationals only.
A few months after arriving in Germany, Michelle applied to a German university to study for a degree. She claimed a maintenance allowance but was refused it on the ground that she had not resided in Germany for a sufficient amount of time to be eligible to claim it.
After six months in Germany Jacques was refused any more benefit payments. He had made no attempt to find work and did not have any money. He was staying with Claude, but Claude has now told him to go.
Claude’s hours at the building site were reduced due to lack of work, therefore his earnings dropped. Desperate for money, he was caught stealing goods from shops and was convicted of shoplifting. The authorities have told him to leave the country immediately.
Sarah was convicted for selling illegal drugs and was sent to prison for six months. On her release the authorities have issued a deportation order against her.
Michelle had been on several political marches and was being watched by the authorities. She has been told that unless she stops this activity she could also be deported.
The authorities have said to Jacques that he has no right to remain in Germany and should leave immediately.
Critically discuss and advise Claude, Sarah, Michelle, Louis and Jacques how EU Law relating to the free movement of persons (Art 45 TFEU) can be argued to the above events.