Latest articles
Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust v DV (A Child) [2021] EWHC 1037 (Fam)
(Family Division, Cohen J, 19 April 2021)Medical Treatment – 17-year-old had form of bone cancer and required surgery For comprehensive, judicially approved coverage of every important...
Domestic Abuse Bill
Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration NewsAfter years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final...
Coercive control and children’s welfare in Re H-N and Others
When families come to strife, arrangements must be made for the future care of any children. In some circumstances, this means an application to the courts. These ‘private law orders’ can...
Profession: Expert Witness
The value of a family business or business interest is treated as an asset and therefore part of the matrimonial pot to be distributed when it comes to negotiating a financial settlement on divorce or...
How does a jointly held property pass on death?
When meeting with clients to discuss their succession planning, many cannot recall whether their property is held jointly as joint tenants or jointly as tenants in common. The distinction is that with...
View all articles
Authors

IMMIGRATION/HUMAN RIGHTS: Konstatinov v Netherlands

Sep 29, 2018, 17:15 PM
Slug : konstatinov-v-netherlands
Meta Title :
Meta Keywords :
Canonical URL :
Trending Article : No
Prioritise In Trending Articles : No
Date : Apr 26, 2007, 04:22 AM
Article ID : 87591

(European Court of Human Rights; 26 April 2007)

The wife had twice been denied a residence permit to stay in the Netherlands with the husband, who held a permanent residence permit but did not comply with the minimum income requirement under the relevant rules in respect of family reunion. The wife was then declared an undesirable alien on account of her criminal record in the Netherlands, entailing a 5-year exclusion order. The wife, threatened with expulsion, argued that the exclusion order breached her rights under the European Convention on Human Rights, Art 8.

The Netherlands had not failed to strike a fair balance between the wife's interests and the state's own interest in controlling immigration and public expenditure and in the prevention of disorder or crime. There had been no violation of Art 8.

Categories :
  • Archive
  • Judgments
Tags :
Authors
Provider :
Product Bucket :
Recommend These Products
Related Articles
Load more comments
Comment by from