European Court of Human Rights delivers judgment in case concerning family reunification

On 8 October 2024, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) gave its judgment in a case concerning Finland. The Court held that there had been no violation of Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life) of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

In the case at issue, the applicant and her children had been granted asylum status and residence permits in Finland in 2016. The applicant’s spouse, the father of her children, who was staying abroad, had lodged an application for a residence permit based on family ties in 2018.

The Finnish Immigration Service rejected the spouse’s application as he had failed to prove that he had sufficient financial resources as required by the Finnish Aliens Act. The requirement for sufficient financial resources became applicable because family reunification had not been applied for within three months following the notification to the sponsor of the positive asylum decision, as required by the Aliens Act. The Court ruled that no exceptionally serious grounds for derogation from the requirement for sufficient financial resources had been presented in the matter.  It also ruled that the best interests of the children did not require that a residence permit be granted to the spouse.

The Helsinki Administrative Court dismissed the applicant’s appeal against the decision of the Finnish Immigration Service. The Supreme Administrative Court did not grant leave to appeal in the case.

In her appeal to the ECtHR, the applicant complained that the refusal by the authorities to issue her spouse with a residence permit had violated her right to respect for her family life (ECHR Article 8). The applicant submitted that Finnish authorities had ignored their individual circumstances and their vulnerability as refugees.

The ECtHR unanimously held that Article 8 had not been violated. The domestic authorities had acted within their margin of appreciation in striking a fair balance between the competing interests at stake. Neither did the ECtHR consider it necessary to intervene in national authorities’ assessment of the best interests of the children.

Read the ruling in the HUDOC database.