4

According to this related question it is possible to stay legally in the Schengen Area after the expiration of a long visa for 90 days.

This is the ammendment from where this quote comes from:

For the purposes of implementing paragraph 1, the date of entry shall be considered as the first day of stay on the territory of the Member States and the date of exit shall be considered as the last day of stay on the territory of the Member States. Periods of stay authorised under a residence permit or a long-stay visa shall not be taken into account in the calculation of the duration of stay on the territory of the Member States.

So this pretty much settles the case, but I don't know to which exact countries this applies.

I am from Brazilian nationality and my country is part of the Annex II countries that don't need a visa to enter the Schengen Area.

However, according to the User manual for the short-stay "Schengen" calculator (cannot post more than 2 links), Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Barbados, Brazil, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Mauritius, and Seychelles are somewhat different because they hold a visa waiver agreement with the EU.

In the same guide it is stated that for these countries

the old definition ("3 months during a 6 months period following the date of first entry") continues to apply

So finally my question is: Does the full old interpretation of the date of first entry (Verification of the length of previous and intended stays under the old rules) still applies to these countries or just the 90 days/180 days part (or any other possibility I haven't thought of)?

I would also like some reliable links to support the answer. This guide is unclear as to how they define the day of first entry and is not an official document


Update: I left Europe to Brazil through the Charles de Gaulle airport at Paris. At first I presented my passport and the border guard asked for my titre de séjour (French long-term visa), which was expired for about 2 months at that time. The guard didn't even comment that it was expired and he let me pass.

So nothing happened to me but I still don't know exactly if I was illegally staying in the country or not.

marked as duplicate by JonathanReez, David Richerby, Willeke, JoErNanO, Zach Lipton Jun 19 '16 at 18:08

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • 4
    I think that I kind of understand what you are getting at but strictly speaking, the question “Would I still need to leave and return the Schengen Area to obtain a tourist visa?” does not make any sense. You don't need to leave and return and you cannot get a visa. The only question is whether you are allowed to stay without a visa. If you do, you don't have to leave and return. If you don't, you have to leave but can't return. There is no point in leaving and coming back. – Relaxed Aug 25 '15 at 19:02
  • I have edited the question, it is indeed inaccurate to say that I would "obtain a tourist visa". If this really applies to me and if I take "date of first entry" literally, it would mean that I would be illegal here if I just stay, but legal if just before my visa expires I leave the Shengen area and return to get a new "date of first entry". Hope it is clearer now, it is a pointless hack around the law – gsmafra Aug 25 '15 at 19:09
  • 1
    No, it can't work that way. Under the old interpretation, you could not leave and reenter to reset anything. You would be stuck with the first date of first entry until you leave the area for at least 6 months. That's the meaning of “any other first entry taking place after the expiry of periods of six months after the date of very first entry.” – Relaxed Aug 25 '15 at 19:12
  • My first intuition was that the date of first entry does not count because it's all part of the long stay but the problem is that this six-month period business derives from an ECJ decision that predates the amendment in question and it's difficult to reconcile both. I haven't seen the actual text of the agreement either. – Relaxed Aug 25 '15 at 19:16
  • But whatever the case may be, the only interpretations that make sense to me is that either you can stay or you cannot. The way I see this, tere is no version of the regulation, no scenario and no interpretation in which leaving and reentering can change anything. – Relaxed Aug 25 '15 at 19:17

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.