Case Law

This case concerned the right of a refugee to change residency between Cantons in Switzerland.

30 September 2022 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Topic(s): Residence permits / Residency | Countries: Switzerland

1. The word “admissible” must mean in the context of paragraph 403(c) the ability to enter lawfully and reside lawfully. “Admissible” does not incorporate the concept of “permanent residence”. 2. The Statelessness Convention does not impose a requirement on contracting parties to grant either permanent residence or citizenship.

25 March 2021 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) | Legal Instrument: 1954 Statelessness Convention | Topic(s): Entry / Exit - Residence permits / Residency - Statelessness | Countries: Kuwait - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

The TAF decided in a principle judgment that the right to family life should be taken into account in a Dublin procedure, even if the family member in Switzerland does not have a secure right of residence.

25 January 2021 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Topic(s): Family reunification - Refugee / Asylum law - Residence permits / Residency | Countries: Switzerland - Syrian Arab Republic

The FAC has ruled that the SEM has to apply the principle of proportionality, which generally applies to revocation of residence permits, in cases where temporary admission is withdrawn. The FAC found that the temporary admission of the appellant, an Eritrea national, should be maintained.

28 October 2020 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Topic(s): Asylum-seekers - Residence permits / Residency | Countries: Eritrea - Switzerland

Immigration Directive 21 of 2015 — validity of directive — imposes blanket ban on asylum seekers applying for visas under Immigration Act 13 of 2002 — inconsistent with Immigration Act — invalid

9 October 2018 | Judicial Body: South Africa: Constitutional Court | Topic(s): Residence permits / Residency - Visas | Countries: South Africa

The Court recalls that the exemption clause for asylum is based on restrictive conditions. Under the Asylum Act (AsylA) and subject to the SEM’s approval, a residence permit may be granted in accordance with the applicable provisions on asylum to any person who has stayed in Switzerland for at least five years from the date the asylum application was submitted, whose place of residence has always been known to the authorities and for whom it is a case of serious hardship due to a high level of integration. The appellant fulfils the first two conditions. With respect to the third condition, the Court underlines, in particular, the misuse of procedures for the purpose of artificially extending the appellant’s stay. It reached the conclusion that the person’s track record in Switzerland to date was not of a nature that justified the granting of a residence permit.

26 September 2018 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Topic(s): Rejected asylum-seekers - Residence permits / Residency | Countries: Russian Federation - Switzerland

in a case which concerns family life as well as immigration, the extent of a State’s obligations will vary according to the particular circumstances of the persons involved and the general interest.

1 March 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Expulsion - Rejected asylum-seekers - Residence permits / Residency - Right to family life | Countries: Germany - Nigeria

The court annulled article 1 of the Law of 15 december 1980 on aliens on the grounds that, the absence of an derogatory regime to the benefit of stateless persons for the fee due in the residence regularisation procedure, constitutes an unjustified difference of treatment between refugees and stateless persons. The absence of an automatic right of residence implies that, de facto, stateless persons have to pay this fee whilst refugees do not.

22 February 2018 | Judicial Body: Belgium: Cour constitutionnelle | Topic(s): Access to procedures - Equality before the law - Residence permits / Residency - Statelessness | Countries: Belgium