According to the ECtHR press release:

"The applicant, Abdelnaser Dabo, is a Syrian national who was born in 1961 and lives in Timmersdala (Sweden). The case concerns legislation introduced in 2016 in Sweden requiring refugees granted asylum to prove they have sufficient income and accommodation in family-reunification requests if the application were lodged more than three months after the sponsor had been granted asylum. The applicant was granted asylum in March 2016, but his first wife and five children’s applications for family reunification were refused because he could not fulfil this “maintenance” requirement. Relying on Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention, the applicant complains that the Swedish authorities had applied the rules too rigidly when refusing to grant his first wife and five children residence permits, alleging that it would be impossible for most people to fulfil the maintenance requirement."

The court noted that the first wife had been living under UNHCR protection in Jordan since the summer of 2013, he has not seen her since then and he further remarried in November 2014 in Sweden where polygamy is not legal. In addition, the court noted the applicant’s five children by his first wife resided with their mother under the UNHCR protection in Jordan since the summer of 2013. When the applicant lodged the family reunification application in November 2016, his children were aged approximately 14, 13, 12, 9 and 7 years old and there were no indications of dependence on him or difficulties as a result of living apart.

On the best interest of the child, the court stated that it cannot constitute an unassailable consideration that requires the admission of all children who would be better off living in a Contracting State.

The court found no violation of Article 8 ECHR because the domestic authorities struck a fair balance between the interests of the applicant and those of the State in controlling immigration, and that they did not overstep the margin of appreciation afforded to them when refusing the request for family reunification.