Immigration Law: Visa Lawsuit at the Administrative Court of Berlin – Court Sees No Exceptional Hardship

Case Background

On 20 July 2022, the applicant, an Afghan national born in 1998, applied for a visa to join his father, who has been living in Germany on a humanitarian residence permit since 2021. The application was rejected by the responsible German embassy in Tehran on 7 May 2023. The applicant, who by his own account lived in precarious circumstances in Iran and later in Turkey, appealed against this decision. He argued that, due to the threat of persecution by the Taliban in Afghanistan and the precarious living conditions in Iran and Turkey, he was entitled to Family reunification is entitled to.

Remonstration and complaint against visa refusal

Court Decision

The Administrative Court ruled that while the plaintiff’s lawsuit was admissible, it was unfounded. The embassy’s decision was lawful, and the plaintiff had no right to be granted the visa. The court determined that the requirements for family reunification under Section 36(2) of the Residence Act (AufenthG) were not met. Since the plaintiff is an adult, he is considered an „other family member,“ and an exceptional hardship would need to be proven for a visa to be issued. However, such hardship was not substantiated.

Examination of Exceptional Hardship

The court stated that exceptional hardship under Section 36(2) of the Residence Act exists only in rare cases where the family member in need of protection is urgently dependent on family support. The plaintiff is capable of leading an independent life and has shown that he can manage in difficult situations, such as by working in a tailor shop in Turkey. The poor economic and political conditions in Afghanistan were also insufficient to establish exceptional hardship.

Rejection of a Claim Based on Humanitarian Grounds

The court also examined whether the plaintiff had a claim for a visa on urgent humanitarian grounds under Section 22 of the Residence Act. However, it was determined that there was no discretion reduction to zero, and the defendant’s decision to grant residence permits only to the father’s minor children was justified. The plaintiff’s mother’s potential health impairment, which might have justified such a claim, was neither sufficiently substantiated nor supported by medical certificates.

Consideration of Cultural and Family Aspects

The court rejected the argument presented by the second intervenor that it is customary in the Afghan cultural context for parents to remain responsible for their children until marriage, regardless of age. These cultural customs cannot replace the legal requirements for family reunification of adult relatives. The plaintiff’s interest in joining his family in Germany also did not justify an exception to the strict legal requirements.

Overall Assessment and Final Decision

In the overall assessment of the circumstances, the court noted that the plaintiff and his family theoretically had the possibility of achieving reunification through the Berlin state program for Afghan refugees. However, it was unclear why no efforts were made to secure the family’s livelihood independently. As there were no grounds for exceptional hardship and no claim on humanitarian grounds, the court dismissed the lawsuit.

Conclusion

The Administrative Court clarified that family reunification for adult children is only possible under very strict conditions. In this case, neither the political and economic conditions in Afghanistan nor the precarious living conditions of the applicant in Turkey were sufficient to justify exceptional hardship or urgent humanitarian reasons. The application for Family reunification rejected.

Important Note: The content of this article has been prepared to the best of our knowledge and belief. However, due to the complexity and constant evolution of the subject matter, we must exclude liability and warranty. Important Notice: The content of this article has been created to the best of our knowledge and understanding. However, due to the complexity and constant changes in the subject matter, we must exclude any liability and warranty.

If you need legal advice, please feel free to call us at 0221 - 80187670 or send us an email at or send an email to info@mth-partner.de info@mth-partner.de

Lawyers in Cologne advise and represent clients nationwide in immigration law.

Picture of Helmer Tieben

Helmer Tieben

I am Helmer Tieben, LL.M. (International Tax), a lawyer who has been admitted to the Cologne Bar Association since 2005. I specialise in landlord and tenant law, employment law, migration law and digital law and advise both local and international clients. With a Master's degree from the University of Melbourne and many years of experience in leading law firms, I offer clear and effective legal solutions. You can also contact me via
Reach Xing Helmer Tieben
and about X:
Helmer Tieben.

Linkedin

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *