In October 2018 the students of the Migration Law Clinic started two new projects:

Family ties and family life

This project concerns a series of cases in which the Dutch Council of State has ruled that there was no right to family reunification of a father with his biological child(ren), who was/were born out of wedlock (Council of State 18 July 2018, ECLI:NL:RVS:2018:2366, ECLI:NL:RVS:2018:2466, ECLI:NL:RVS:2018:2467, ECLI:NL:RVS:2018:2469 and 10 September, ECLI:NL:RVS:2018:2940). The Council of State considered that there were no factual family ties between the father and the child. The question is whether the refusal of family reunification on this ground in in conformity with Article 8 ECHR and EU law.

This project is supervised by Betty de Hart and Pieter Boeles

Rejection of visa on the basis of an objection by another EU Member State

This project concern several cases, in which a short term visa for the Netherlands was rejected automatically on the basis of an objection by an (unknown) EU Member State. The question addressed in this project is of this automatic refusal is in conformity with EU law, specifically the Visa Code and Articles 41 (the right to good administration) and 47 (the right to an effective remedy) of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. Are Member States required on the basis of the principle of mutual trust to automatically accept the objection of another EU Member State? Is the right to an effective remedy respected, taking into account that the applicant does often not know which Member State objected against the grant of a visa nor for what reasons the objection was made.

This project is supervised by Evelien Brouwer and Pieter Boeles

From January 2018 to June 2018 the students of the Migration law Clinic worked on the following projects:

Effective remedies in visa cases

This project concerns preliminary questions to the Court of Justice (CJEU) from the disctrict court in Utrecht in a visa case. The case concerns the request of Sri Lankan nationals for a Schengenvisa for the Netherlands. On the basis of a bilateral agreement they needed to apply for this visa at VSF Global (a private organisation), which decides on visa application on behalf of Switzerland, which decides in its turn on behalf of the Netherlands. The visa were refused by VSF Global. The applicants submitted an objection against this rejection in the Netherlands. The Dutch authorities declared this objection inadmissible. They stated that they do not have the authority to decide on the visa applications. The applicants appealed this decision before the district court. The court asks the CJEU amongst others whether the right to an effective remedy as guaranteed by Article 47 of the Charter is respected, if the decision to reject an application for a visa can only be appealed before an administrative or judicial body in the State, which has taken this decision on behalf of another State.

This project was supervised by Evelien Brouwer and Kees Groenendijk

Withdrawal of nationality of persons convicted of terrorism related crimes/persons who left the Netherlands to combat in Syria

This project concerns the withdrawal of Dutch nationality of persons, who have been convicted of a terrorism related crime or who have left the Netherland in order to combat in Syria. These persons were born in the Netherlands or have lived in the Netherlands for a very long time. Their Dutch nationality can be withdrawn, because they also have the Moroccan nationality. The project will address questions regarding amongst others non-discrimination, loss of EU citizenship and proportionality.

This project was supervised by Betty de Hart and Pieter Boeles

The Migration Law expert opinions can be found here.

If you have suggestions for cases or topics for the Migration Law Clinic, you can contact the Clinic coordinator (migrationlawclinic@vu.nl). See also under ‘For Clients’.

We will take new projects from February 2019