schengen visa

Perhaps if the above doesn't get through to who the German staffer is that needs a refreshment course, you may also point out the Mrax ruling.

Available in all EU languages:

http://curia.europa.eu/juris/liste.jsf?pro=&lgrec=nl&nat=or&oqp=&dates=&lg=&language=en&jur=C%2CT%2CF&cit=none%2CC%2CCJ%2CR%2C2008E%2C%2C%2C%2C%2C%2C%2C%2C%2C%2Ctrue%2Cfalse%2Cfalse&num=c-459%2F99&td=%3BALL&pcs=Oor&avg=&page=1&mat=or&jge=&for=&cid=482784

---------

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

25 July 2002 (1)

(Third country nationals who are the spouse of a Member State national - Requirement for a visa - Right of entry for spouses not in possession of identity documents or a visa - Right of residence for spouses who have entered unlawfully - Right of residence for spouses who have entered lawfully but whose visa has expired when they apply for a residence permit - Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC and 73/148/EEC and Regulation (EC) No 2317/95)

(....)

    Those questions were raised in proceedings between Mouvement contre le racisme, l'antisémitisme et la xénophobie ASBL (Movement to combat racism, anti-Semitism and xenophobia; MRAX) and the Belgian State for annulment of the Circular of the Ministers for the Interior and for Justice of 28 August 1997 concerning the procedure for publication of banns of marriage and the documents which must be produced in order to obtain a visa for the purpose of contracting a marriage in the Kingdom of Belgium or to obtain a visa for the purpose of reuniting a family on the basis of a marriage contracted abroad (Moniteur belge of 1 October 1997, p. 25905; the Circular of 28 August 1997).

(...)

________

Though this is mostly aimed if an immigration officer wrongly demands an entry visa (C, D, other) to apply for residency and the ruling shows that such a thing cannot be demanded in order to start the residency application for elibable family members, by extention this ruling can also show an embassy (visa is issuing) staffer that any visa needs to be provided ASAP. Obviously C or D are both fine example and no other paperwork is requires than what we explained in the previous posts, the ruling also confirms this though be it referring to detectives that came for 2004/38 (which combined some into one for sake of clarity but apparently not clear enough for this officer). 

Keep us updates, if you find a skilled or experienced staffer all.should be or have been fixed swiftly. :)