George55 wrote on Sat Jan 27, 2024 2:46pm:
You slightly mis-interpret what my intended point was although I didn't really expand on it much here - a new piece of legislation could well be struck down but it won't be struck down for the same reasons as this one was.
This was struck down because the Court considered it effectively a "bolt-on" to the original legislation and not directly correlated to the original intention of the bill....
Read more...
...
If a new piece of legislation was introduced specific to achieving a "2nd home owner visa for British citizens" then it wouldn't be struck out for the same reason as this one - but it could be struck out or ultimately ruled as unconstitutional/discriminatory in whichever Court - either in the French courts system or the EU courts system.
Personally, I don't think you should have legislation that specifically benefits one group of people over another - making it a "2nd home owner visa for anyone" would seem to make more sense and not be as discriminatory.
I personally consider that it's quite acceptable that British people who've worked hard (not down the pub every night) saved, taken financial risks, invested their money in another country to achieve a lifelong ambition to retire to a better climate should take preference over others. They didn't vote for Brexit ( caveat emptor) because overall they had better critical thinking skills and saw the pitfalls. They are now caught up in Brexit cult fallout through no fault of their own . They help the local economy in those countries where they settle. They restore the housing stock.They pay their taxes there. If Stanley Johnson, the traitor Boris's father can swan off to France, the rest of us should be shown the same courtesy.