Expulsion of Alien Case
| Date | 12 Enero 1966 |
| Court | Obsolete Court (Germany) |
The individual in international law Fundamental human rights and freedoms Right to respect for family life Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights Public order and security The law of the Federal Republic of Germany
The individual in international law Aliens Expulsion of alien Right of expulsion Protection of family life Public order and security Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights The law of the Federal Republic of Germany
Summary: The facts:The plaintiff1 was an Italian national. In March 1961 he came to Germany and was granted a permit of residence which was repeatedly renewed until 11 May 1964, when his permit was again renewed until 1 March 1965. On 27 October 1961 the plaintiff married a German national. There were no children of the marriage.
On 12 December 1964 the plaintiff applied for a further renewal of his residence permit. On 8 January the defendant2 refused to grant a renewal and at the same time issued an order indefinitely prohibiting the plaintiff from remaining in the Federal Republic of Germany. The defendant justified this action against the plaintiff on the grounds that the plaintiff had been convicted on a number of charges of theft and traffic offences. On the theft charges, he had been sentenced to nine months' imprisonment but released on parole.
The plaintiff objected to the defendant's order, contending that he had been granted parole, which indicated that the Court had assumed that he would be law-abiding in the future. He claimed furthermore that his expulsion would endanger his marriage because his sick wife, who did not know any Italian, would be incapable of following him to Italy.
Held:The principles of the protection of the family and of public order and security must be carefully balanced against one another. Depending on the personal circumstances and on the prognosis of the plaintiff's future behaviour the principle of protection of the family in this case would be given priority. Families with children and childless families should receive equal protection.
The following is the text of the relevant parts of the judgment:
[The Court stated the facts as outlined above and continued:]
The Court must assume that due to her ailing health the plaintiff's wife cannot be ordered to follow the plaintiff to Italy. Therefore the refusal of the plaintiff's application to renew his residence permit...
Um weiterzulesen
FORDERN SIE IHR PROBEABO AN