The applicant, a Syrian national, complained before the ECtHR about a violation of Article 8 of the European Convention, about the temporary suspension of family reunification in Sweden for beneficiaries of subsidiary protection. On 17 January 2018 the Swedish Migration Agency rejected his wife’s application for family reunification on the basis of the Act on Temporary Restrictions of the Possibility of Being Granted a Residence Permit in Sweden (Lagen om tillfälliga begränsningar av möjligheten att få uppehållstillstånd i Sverige, Act no. 2016:752). The decision remained final on 15 November 2018 when the Migration Court of Appeal refused leave to appeal.

On 22 June 2020 the wife entered Sweden, requested asylum and on 22 July 2020, she was granted subsidiary protection in Sweden, extended for 2 years on 2 December 2021.

The ECtHR rejected the application as manifestly ill-founded, holding that it sees no reason to question the rationale of imposing a waiting period for family reunification to beneficiaries of subsidiary protection. In the applicant’s case the waiting period was less than two years and there was no indication that the wife was vulnerable or dependent on the applicant. The court further noted that an individualised assessment was carried out and that the Swedish authorities struck a fair balance between the interests at stake (the applicant’s interest in being reunited with his wife and the economic well-being of the country by regulating immigration and controlling public expenditure).