Can anyone help me with this scenario question please.?

Question

The European Community enacts Directive 01/222 on 1 January 2006 (fictitious) that gives the rights to male employees to claim a one-month period of paternity leave after their partners have given birth. The United Kingdom has announced that they will not be bound by that directive as a 2005 Fathers Rights Act (fictitious) provides for paternity leave of 2 weeks; any more time, the UK claims, would be unnecessary and detrimental to British companies.

Four friends, whose partners happen to be pregnant, ask you to act as their solicitor. Andrew works for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Joshua, an Indian citizen, works for Uxbridge Council. Joshua is married to Christine, a French citizen who is unemployed but was looking for work before she got pregnant. Robert also works for Uxbridge Council. Finally, Simon, an Italian, works for Barclays Bank.

Christine gets really annoyed with the decision of Uxbridge Council not to give her husband one month’s paternity leave. She discusses her feelings with Joshua and the angrier they get, the more radical options they come up with; eventually, they decide to set the Uxbridge Council building on fire ‘in order to teach them a lesson’. The police arrest both of them and they are now worried in case they are deported.

Advise Andrew, Joshua, Christine, Robert and Simon on their rights

Answer 1

Wow, what a mess! I believe Joshua and Christine will face charges in Britain for their "vigilante" action of burning down the Uxbridge Council building despite the fact that neither are British citizens.

However, because they are citizens of European countries...all of the males except Andrew, who is evidently British...will qualify for the month's paternity leave. Andrew will have his two weeks to change diapers, mull over his sins, and watch football (soccer) on TV.

Answer 2

Your fact pattern indicates that only Joshua and Christine were involved with the arson charge. They will be prosecuted under British law and probably be deported thereafter. As for the others, they can apply for their paternity leave. It appears that Simon can qualify for the one month leave because he is not British. You don't say Robert's nationality but it appears that he will be bound by the two week rule as well as Andrew.
If they want to use themselves as a test case, they can appeal the case to the European Union to determine if Great Britain is bound by the Directive or not. I don't know what the terms of the European Union compact include, whether or not there is an escape clause for individual countries that decide not to abide by the EU Decisions. If such a clause exists, then the union is weak and won't be able to hold itself together.

Answer 3

2 wrongs do not make a right.. burning down a building is not a good response to not being alowed paturnity leave...
I am not a lawyer so I dont know what their rights would be...

on a human level - people who cannot afford to take time off work - shouldnt be having kids in the first place...Christine - being unemployed should have been on birth control... unfortunately the real world doesnt work that way.. and most people dont think with their heads...