The agency justified its decision on suspicion of a crime, but according to the Supreme Administrative Court, the decision lacked overall consideration.
From northern Macedonia the man’s maintenance work on the car was close to paying him a permanent residence permit in Finland.
The man had lived in Finland for more than four years, in addition to which he had a Finnish spouse and two minor children.
The negative decision was caused by the fact that the applicant for a permanent residence permit had welded his car in the public parking garage of the shopping center. Police began investigating the act as a gross negligence of general danger, but later the suspicion of crime was diluted to basic negligence.
General danger in negligence, a person commits an act of negligence, the characteristics of which are suitable for destruction work, traffic destruction work, endangering health or a nuclear explosive offense.
A felony requires that the act as a whole be aggravated and that the perpetrator poses a serious danger to life or health to a large number of people.
A felony is punishable by four months to four years in prison. In the basic act, the penalties range from fines to imprisonment.
Finnish Immigration Service considered that the person ‘s criminal suspicion was an obstacle to the issue of a permanent residence permit. A permanent residence permit may be refused, inter alia, when an alien is suspected of an offense punishable by imprisonment.
A man doing welding work appealed against the decision of the Finnish Immigration Service. The Helsinki Administrative Court did not see any error in the agency’s operations, but the Supreme Administrative Court (Supreme Administrative Court) ruled differently in its yearbook decision.
When considering obstacles to the issuance of a permanent residence permit, the quality and seriousness of the criminal offense must be taken into account, but also the overall assessment required by law.
“However, it does not appear from the Finnish Immigration Service’s decision that the quality and seriousness of the appellant’s criminal act and the length of his stay in Finland and his ties to Finland, on the one hand, were assessed as required by the provision,” the Supreme Court stated.
It annulled previous decisions and referred the matter back to the Finnish Immigration Service.
.
#Residence #permit #man #welded #car #parking #garage #shopping #center #Finnish #Immigration #Service #refused #permanent #residence #permit #Supreme #Court #considered #decision #incorrect
