The case concerned the application by the Finnish Immigration Service of the exclusion clause related to the committal of a serious non-political crime. In the appeal, the applicant argued that there shall be an examination of whether there were mitigating or criminal liability-removing circumstances, such as the criteria of justification and forgiveness, which meant that the exclusion clause should not be applied. The Administrative Court noted that the applicant and his brother have been shot by the victim which fact could have been surprising and threatening to the applicant. However, after his family members fled the premises, the applicant went upstairs and came back armed, opened a fire assault towards the victim and seriously wounded the victim. In these circumstances, it can no longer be assumed that the victim posed an immediate threat to the applicant and his family members, but that his acts went beyond justified and necessary reaction in that situation.

The Administrative Court stated that there were reasonable grounds for suspecting that the applicant had committed a serious non-political crime outside Finland before he came to Finland as a refugee, and took into consideration the nature of the act, the instrument of the act, the injuries suffered by the victim, the consequences laid down in the applicant's home country and the criminal proceedings initiated, as well as the fact that the majority of the legal systems of the EU+ countries consider that an act such fulfilled the characteristics of a serious offence.

The Administrative Court held that, in view of the applicant’s act, there were no circumstances removing or mitigating the criminal liability of his act which would have led to a different assessment of the case. Consequently, the Finnish Immigration Service had to apply the exclusion clause in accordance with Section 87(2)(2)(2) of the Aliens Act.