| Applicant name | SAVURAN |
| Applicant type | immigrant |
| Number of applicants | 1 |
| Country | DENMARK |
| Application no. | 3645/23 |
| Date | 12/11/2024 |
| Judges | Gabriele Kucsko-Stadlmayer, President, Tim Eicke, Faris Vehabović, Armen Harutyunyan, Anja Seibert-Fohr, Anne Louise Bormann, Mateja Đurović |
| Institution | Court |
| Type | Judgment |
| Outcome Art. 8 | No violation |
| Reason | Necessary 9crime and disorder) |
| Type of privacy | relational privacy |
| Keywords | re-entry ban |
| Facts of the case | The application concerns an order made in criminal proceedings for the expulsion of a settled migrant. The applicant complained under Article 8 of the Convention. |
| Analysis | aking account of all the elements described above, the Court concludes that the interference with the applicant’s private life was supported by relevant and sufficient reasons. It is satisfied that “very serious reasons” were adequately adduced by the national authorities when assessing his case. It notes that at all levels of jurisdiction there was an explicit and thorough assessment of whether the expulsion order could be considered to be contrary to Denmark’s international obligations. The Court points out in this connection that where independent and impartial domestic courts have carefully examined the facts, applying the relevant human rights standards consistently with the Convention and its case-law, and adequately weighed up the applicant’s personal interests against the more general public interest in the case, it is not for the Court to substitute its own assessment of the merits (including, in particular, its own assessment of the factual details of proportionality) for that of the competent national authorities. The only exception to this is where there are shown to be strong reasons for doing so (ibid., § 189, with further references). In the Court’s, opinion, such strong reasons are absent in the present case. |
| Other Article violation? | – |
| Damage awarded | – |
| Documents | Judgment |