Sweden - Migration Court of Appeal, 6 September 2010, UM 8098-09

What was at stake

EDAL summary. The right to family life can outweigh the ‘state responsibility’ criteria in the Dublin II Regulation. The Court held that the application for asylum should be processed in Sweden, in order to secure...

What happened

The applicant sought asylum in Sweden with his wife and later their son. After initially being transferred to Germany under the Dublin II Regulation, the applicant's wife returned to Sweden with their son and applied for asylum there. The applicant contested a decision to transfer him back to Germany, arguing that family unity should be preserved.

What the court decided

The Migration Court of Appeal held that the right to family and private life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights can outweigh the 'state responsibility' criteria in the Dublin II Regulation. The court found that transferring the applicant to Germany would constitute a disproportionate interference with his family life, despite Germany being the otherwise responsible state, and therefore his asylum application should be processed in Sweden.

How the court got there

The court found that while the transfer to Germany was in accordance with the Dublin II Regulation, it would disproportionately interfere with the applicant's right to family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The court emphasized the importance of examining the asylum claims of family members together to avoid splitting the family and concluded that the interest in maintaining family unity outweighed the need for predictability in the Dublin system.

Statutes and cases cited

Categories

Authoritative link