CEDHCASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 4 décembre 2012
- ECLI
- ECLI:CEDH:001-115788
- Date
- 4 décembre 2012
- Publication
- 4 décembre 2012
droits fondamentauxCEDH
Source : DILA / Judilibre · open data
Mes notes
privées · visibles par vous seulAnalyse IA non disponible
Générez un résumé intelligent de cette décision
Texte intégral
.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sFC8B7517 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:48pt; text-align:center } .sEE8FA83B { margin-top:48pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s2D57E2E { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sEC177689 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s9296A950 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA284A115 { width:11.79pt; text-indent:0pt; display:inline-block } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }   THIRD SECTION Application no. 12738/10 Meriam Margriet JEUNESSE against the Netherlands lodged on 1 March 2010 QUESTIONS TO THE GOVERNMENT 1. Having regard to the specific circumstances of the case, is there any reason to assume that the applicant, if she filed such a request in Suriname, would not be eligible for a provisional residence visa ( machtiging tot voorlopig verblijf )?   2.     Is the insistence on the applicant complying with the provisional residence visa requirement in the specific circumstances of the case justified by factors going beyond a simple enforcement of Dutch immigration law, or could it be regarded as disproportionate for the purposes of Article 8?   3. What, if any, practical steps have been taken by the Netherlands authorities before 26 February 2010 aimed at the applicant’s effective removal from the Netherlands going beyond merely informing her that she is under a legal obligation to leave the Netherlands? QUESTIONS TO THE APPLICANT 1.   What is the current situation (health, schooling etc.) of the applicant’s oldest child? You are requested to substantiate your reply with documents.   2.   What is the current employment situation of the applicant’s husband and do the applicant and her family have other sources of income? You are requested to substantiate your reply with documents.    Citations
Aucune citation répertoriée pour cette décision.
Décisions connexes
Aucune décision similaire identifiée pour le moment.
Synthèse
- Juridiction
- CEDH
- Chambre
- CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG
- Date
- 4 décembre 2012
- Matière
- droits fondamentaux
Référence
ECLI:CEDH:001-115788
Données disponibles
- Texte intégral
- Résumé officiel