In very simple terms two of the three must be the same;
Airspace
Licence
Registration
The above is a very well worn rumour working its way around the GA scene and is untrue, except by pure fluke. There is NO such rule whatsoever.
ICAO guarantees only one thing: if the country of license issue matches the country of registry, you can fly all over ICAO-land, noncommercially.
The practice is more restrictive, of course. There is stuff like PPR, and there are countries (ICAO members) where they will make you into soup.
But not IFR if its a JAA licence that is subject to JAR-FCL 1.175 ANO Schedule 8.
Can you explain what that means, in plain language and with references, Whopity?
But the CI are not in the EU...?
OK I agree there. IOM residents should also be protected from anything cenceivably to do with EASA.
Interestingly the ICAO provision I referred to uses the word "nationals" which I think means a
citizenship. Now, most CI/IOM residents do also hold a UK citizenship, don't they? To guard against the worst case scenario (if the wording was thus amended) they would have to revoke their UK citizenship. This is possible (it is on the Home Office website) but has certain drawbacks, and losing the right of abode in the UK is one of them. I don't know whether EASA's use of "resident" rather than "national" is deliberate - I suppose they had to do that because the EU is not a "country" and there is no such thing as an "EU citizenship". But in that case the EASA proposal is in breach of ICAO. Still, it doesn't matter because they can always file a difference to ICAO, on absolutely anything.