EDAL case summaries
Keywords: Dependant (Dependent person), Family member, Family reunification, Family unity (right to), Refugee Status, Sponsor
Article 10(2) of Directive 2003/86 allows Member States to define autonomously the nature of the relationship of dependence between the sponsor and the family member not referred in art. 4, as long as the national law have regard of all the relevant circumstances of the refugee’s situation through a case-by-case approach.
Date: 12-12-2019
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Family member, Family reunification, Residence document, Sponsor, Visa
The principle of effectiveness and the objectives of the Family Reunification Directive preclude domestic legislation that foresees the automatic issue of an entry and residence permit for family reunification on the sole ground that the time limit to decide on the application has expired without having established the substantial requirements for obtaining such a permit, e.g. family links.
Date: 20-11-2019
Country of Decision: Germany
Country of Applicant: Syria
Keywords: Dublin Transfer, Effective remedy (right to), Family member, Family reunification, Family unity (right to), Humanitarian considerations, Personal circumstances of applicant, Request that charge be taken, Responsibility for examining application, Sponsor, Vulnerable person
The discretionary clause in Art. 17 II Dublin-III regulation might under certain circumstances oblige the member states to take charge of an applicant. This can be particularly the case, if the competence of the member state under chapter III of the Dublin-III regulation would not be given because of a deadline expiry the applicant had no influence on.
Date: 15-03-2019
Country of Decision: United Kingdom
Country of Applicant: Congo (DRC), Lebanon, United Kingdom
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Best interest of the child, Dependant (Dependent person), Family member, Family reunification, Family unity (right to), Persecution (acts of), Personal circumstances of applicant, Refugee Status, Relevant Documentation, Sponsor, Well-founded fear
The Immigration Rules (“the Rules”) minimum income requirements (“the MIR”) for individuals who have a right to live in the UK who wish to bring their non-EEA citizen spouses to live with them are not open to legal challenge.
The Rules fail unlawfully to give effect to the duty of the Secretary of State (“the SoS”) in respect of the welfare of children under s.55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 (“the 2009 Act”), however the challenge to the validity of the Rules was dismissed.
To ensure that their decisions are compatible with the Human Rights Act...
Date: 22-02-2017
Country of Decision: Belgium
Country of Applicant: Cameroon
Keywords: Family member, Family reunification, Sponsor
When assessing the legal requirement that a Belgian spouse has to prove that he/she has means of subsistence which are “stable, regular and sufficient”, the applicant’s financial means can be taken into consideration [because according to art. 221.1 and 2 of the Civil Code the Belgian spouse is capable of legally disposing of the applicant’s financial means].
Date: 25-01-2016
Country of Decision: Slovenia
Country of Applicant: Somalia
Keywords: Best interest of the child, Dependant (Dependent person), Family member, Family reunification, Family unity (right to), Sponsor
The State is obliged to adopt legislation which allows the refugee to actually exercise the right to respect for family life in its territory. Under Article 53(3) of the Constitution of the Republic of Slovenia the scope of family life firstly includes the nuclear family and secondly, where specific factual circumstances dictate, members of the family who are not nuclear but who are similar or perform the same function.
The legislator limited the right to family reunification by enacting an exhaustive definition of eligible family members for reunification, excluding any other form...
Date: 14-01-2015
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Family member, Family reunification, Sponsor
A national law which requires the sponsor and his/her spouse to have reached the age of 21 by the date on which the application for family reunification is submitted (rather than by the date on which the decision on the application is made) is consistent with Art. 4 (5) of the Family Reunion Directive (Directive 2003/86/EC)
Date: 17-07-2014
Country of Applicant: Morocco
Keywords: Family member, Family reunification, Sponsor
The Family Reunification Directive does not make a distinction between whether a family relationship arose before or after the entry of the resident into the Member State. An application for family reunification may not be refused where the sponsor, the resident within EU territory, has proved that he has stable and regular resources which are sufficient to maintain himself and the members of his family, but who, given the level of his resources, will, nevertheless, be entitled to claim special assistance in order to meet exceptional, individually determined, essential living costs, tax...
Date: 04-03-2010
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Family member filterFamily member
- (-) Remove Sponsor filterSponsor
- Family reunification 8
- Family unity (right to) 4
- Dependant (Dependent person) 3
- Best interest of the child 2
- Personal circumstances of applicant 2
- Refugee Status 2
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 1
- Dublin Transfer 1
- Effective remedy (right to) 1
- Humanitarian considerations 1
- Persecution (acts of) 1
- Relevant Documentation 1
- Request that charge be taken 1
- Residence document 1
- Responsibility for examining application 1
- Visa 1
- Vulnerable person 1
- Well-founded fear 1
Filter by country of applicant
- Afghanistan 2
- Cameroon 1
- Congo (DRC) 1
- Lebanon 1
- Morocco 1
- Somalia 1
- Syria 1
- United Kingdom 1
Filter by country of decision
- Belgium 1
- Germany 1
- Slovenia 1
- United Kingdom 1
