Khan v. Germany - 38030/12 - Legal Summary [2015] ECHR 442 (23 April 2015)

Khan v. Germany - 38030/12 - Legal Summary [2015] ECHR 442 (23 April 2015)

The Court found that, although the applicant had lived in Germany for over twenty years and her mental health had improved, the seriousness of the original offence, the lack of strong social integration, the availability of medical care in Pakistan, and the legitimate aim of public safety justified the expulsion. The impact on the applicant's private life did not outweigh the danger posed to public safety, and the German authorities had not overstepped their margin of appreciation.

Citation
[2015] ECHR 442
Parties
Applicant: Khan; Respondent: Germany
Jurisdiction
European Union
Judgment Date
23 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Judgment
Outcome
expulsion would not constitute a violation of Article 8
Legal Topics
Expulsion, Right to Respect for Private and Family Life, Mental Health, Public Safety
Human Rights Law Immigration Law Expulsion Right to Respect for Private and Family Life Mental Health Public Safety

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Khan

Applicant

Germany

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to the European Court of Human Rights / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the proposed expulsion of a mentally ill person who had lived and worked in Germany for over twenty years would violate Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found that, although the applicant had lived in Germany for over twenty years and her mental health had improved, the seriousness of the original offence, the lack of strong social integration, the availability of medical care in Pakistan, and the legitimate aim of public safety justified the expulsion. The impact on the applicant's private life did not outweigh the danger posed to public safety, and the German authorities had not overstepped their margin of appreciation.

Court Disposition

expulsion would not constitute a violation of Article 8