The Ministry of Refugees, Immigration and Integration Affairs
Rejection of application for family reunification
A, B and C, who are siblings, were born in Turkey in 1992, 1996 and 1997, respectively.
In the period from 1997 to 2004, they lived with their paternal grandmother in Turkey. In 2004, they moved in with their mother in Turkey. Their father left for Denmark in 1997 and sought asylum there. In 1998, he was granted a residence permit in Denmark based on his marriage to a Danish citizen. They were divorced in 2001, and that same year, he married the children's mother in Turkey.
After having their application for a residence permit rejected in 2003, the three siblings went to Denmark with their mother in 2005 and submitted a new application for a residence permit. In 2006, the Danish Immigration Service rejected their application. Yet another application was rejected by the Immigration Service for the third time in 2007, and the Ministry of Refugees, Immigration and Integration Affairs upheld the rejection.
The application for family reunification was submitted after the expiry of the two-year deadline stipulated in S. 9(13), second sentence, of the Danish Aliens Act. It follows from S. 9(13), first sentence, that a residence permit can only be issued if the applicants have or are able to obtain such ties with Denmark that there is a basis for successful integration in Denmark. However, this does not apply "if exceptional reasons make it inappropriate, including regard for family unity".
The Supreme Court stated that the hearing pursuant to S. 63 of the Danish Constitutional Act of the Ministry's decision to reject the application for family reunification must be based on the applicants' circumstances at the time of the Ministry's decision, and that no regard can be had to the ties with Denmark which they may have otherwise obtained subsequently.
The Supreme Court stated that rejection of a residence permit under S. 9(13), first sentence, of the Aliens Act does not require that it must be considered that the reason for the application for a residence permit only being submitted after the expiry of the two-year deadline was that the child's parents want "the child to be brought up in accordance with the culture and customs of the native country and not be influenced by Danish standards and values".
The Supreme Court held that the specific information on which the Ministry had based its decision was factual and adequate and did not find reason to set aside the Ministry's discretionary assessment of whether A, B and C had or were able to obtain such ties with Denmark that there was a basis for successful integration in this country. In addition, the Supreme Court did not set aside the Ministry's assessment that there were no exceptional reasons that would allow derogation from the conditions provided in S. 9(13), first sentence.
The High Court had reached the same conclusion.