Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
SE: The Migration Court of Appeal rejected the deportation of a child born in Sweden on the basis of ties with Sweden and the best interest of the child

Input Provided By
Other Source/Information:
Referral to the CJEU
Relevant Legislative Provisions
European Convention on Human Rights; UN International Covenants / UN Conventions;
Sweden, Migration Court of Appeal [Migrationsöverdomstolen] , TS, RS (Lebanon) and MS v Swedish Migration Agency (Migrationsverket), MIG 2020:24 UM2944-20, 22 December 2020. Link redirects to the English summary in the EUAA Case Law Database.
Permanent link to the case
Case history
Related cases:

The applicants TS and RS, Lenbanese nationals, have unsuccesfully applied for asylum in Sweden. Their daughter. MS is a 14-year-old child, born and raised in Sweden. Deportation orders have been issued against the three of them and they appealed against and requested to be granted temporary residence permit. 

According to the Swedish legislation, residence permits under Chapter 5, Section 6 of the Aliens Act may only be granted if it would be contrary to an obligation to refuse or expel the alien (Section 11 of the Temporary Act). Such a residence permit shall normally be limited in time and shall be valid for thirteen months (Section 12 of the Temporary Act).

The Migration Appeal Court based its judgement on the provision of national law, the UN Convention in the Rights of the Child and the European Convention of Human Rights (and ECtHR case law) to conclude that MS has to be granted a residence permit due to exceptional and distressful situation as well as her very strong connections with Sweden. An expulsion was assessed as not proportional and contrary to the article 8 of the ECHR and to the best interest of the child. A travel to Lebanon would have a negative effect since she had never been there and has no ties with the country of origin of her parents. 

As for TS and RS, the Migration Court of Appeal concluded that a separation of the family would be contrary to the right to family life under Article 8 of the ECHR, and consequently contrary contrary to a Swedish Convention obligation to expel them. The Court noted there were no grounds for refusing any of them a residence permit

Country of Decision
Court Name
SE: Migration Court of Appeal [Migrationsöverdomstolen]
Case Number
MIG 2020:24 UM2944-20
Date of Decision
Country of Origin
Assessment of Application
Minor / Best interests of the child