Sweden - Migration Court of Appeal, 24 October 2011, UM 2599-11

Country of Decision:
Country of Applicant:
Date of Decision:
UM 2599-11
Court Name:
Migration Court of Appeal
National / Other Legislative Provisions:
Sweden - Utlänningslagen (Aliens Act) (2005:716) - Chapter 12 Section 19
Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionPDF version of SummaryPDF version of Summary

Conversion to Christianity led to a re-examination of impediments to enforcement.


The applicant had previously applied for asylum but had his application denied. The decision had entered into force (2009). In January 2011 he requested a re-examination of his case due to new circumstances impending the enforcement of the expulsion order. The new circumstances invoked were that he had converted to Christianity. On 18 February 2011 the Migration Board decided not to grant a re-examination as the new circumstance were not found to constitute a need for protection as expressed in Chapter 12 Sections 1-3. The Stockholm Migration Court found that the applicant had not presented a valid reason as required in Chapter 12 Section 19 for not invoking the conversion earlier. 

Decision & Reasoning: 

The Migration Court of Appeal began the judgement with a discussion of Articles 32 and 34 of the Qualification Directive and how these correspond to the Swedish law Chapter 12 Section 19. The Migration Court of Appeal then concluded that the applicant had not been able to present the new circumstances in any open case. Furthermore, an asylum seeker is not obliged to invoke circumstances regarding impediments to enforcement within a specific period of time. The applicant can therefore not have been expected to present a valid excuse as regards his conversion. The Migration Court thus had no right to dismiss the appeal on such grounds. The Migration Court of Appeal finally found that there had been no assessment in the Migration Court regarding whether the new circumstances could present a lasting impediment to the enforcement of an expulsion order.


The case was remitted to the Migration Court.