Judgment delivered on 14 May 2019
A, B and C
The Immigration Appeals Board
Refusal of family reunification not in contravention of the European Human Rights Convention
A, B and C are all Syrian nationals who came to Denmark in 2015 and were granted a temporary residence permit because of the general situation in their home country. In January 2017 and March 2017, the Immigration Appeals Board rejected their applications for family reunification with their spouses and children. The reason for the refusals was that the applicants at the time had not had a residence permit in Denmark for three years, and that there were no exceptional reasons that would justify derogation from this condition.
The Supreme Court was asked to review the Immigration Appeals Board's decisions to refuse family reunification.
The Supreme Court held that the requirement in the Danish Aliens Act that the applicants must, as a general rule, have had a residence permit in Denmark for three years before being entitled to family reunification with their children was within the State's margin of appreciation when weighing the consideration for their family life and the interests of the children against the interests of the general good in accordance with Article 8 of the European Human Rights Convention. The Supreme Court also held that the refusal of family reunification with the applicants' spouses was within the State's margin of appreciation under Article 8 of the Convention, and that there was otherwise no reason to set aside the Immigration Appeals Board's decision, and that the applicants were not entitled to compensation.
The High Court had reached the same conclusion.