Some recent Supreme Administrative Court cases

[Rip]

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/oikeus/kho/muut/2013/201300453
A Tunisian citizen that had been given the EC residence permit by Sweden had applied for a residence permit for an employed person. Permit had been denied as suitable work force had been considered being available in Finland and EEA area (and the permit granted by Sweden did not make the applicant part of that workforce). The earlier decision was confirmed to have been proper by the Supreme Administrative Court.

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/oikeus/kho/vuos ... /201202533
Applicant had applied for continuation of his residence permit (after staying with earlier permits for three years here) three weeks after his earlier permit had expired. A new permit had been granted but the residence permit had been considered interrupted. On appeal the applicant claimed his residency should be considered uninterrupted as the legal text regarding renewal applications contains the words "[submitted within old validity time] or otherwise has been submitted without delay", and the problem had been caused by his lawyer anyway. The supreme court did not give a clear definition of the "otherwise has been submitted without delay", but did state it was definitely less than three weeks (Monday submission when the old permit expired on Saturday would have likely been considered OK). The appeal was therefore denied.

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/oikeus/kho/vuos ... /201201388
Application by declaration for citizenship. Applicant's father had been born in Finland in 1903 and moved to Russia in 1908. Complex case where perhaps the part having most general validity is that the court considered that according the laws of the day it seems unlikely that any emigrants that moved out of Finland in early 20th century would have lost their Finnish citizenship prior to 1st of January 1928, even in the case they would have become already earlier naturalized citizens of some other country. Unlikely they will be applying restoration of their citizenship rights any more, but this can effect also the rights of their offspring.

[sy]

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/oikeus/kho/muut/2013/201300453
A Tunisian citizen that had been given the EC residence permit by Sweden had applied for a residence permit for an employed person. Permit had been denied as suitable work force had been considered being available in Finland and EEA area (and the permit granted by Sweden did not make the applicant part of that workforce). The earlier decision was confirmed to have been proper by the Supreme Administrative Court.

I didn't find the info from the decision that the applicant has the EC residence permit. It only mentions that Sweden has granted the (national) permanent residence permit to the applicant. Of course, with this permit only, the applicant is treated as any other fresh non-EU foreigners.

If the applicant had EC residence permit issued by Sweden, he/she could have bypassed the work force consideration phase.

[Rip]

That was one of the short publications lacking detail. The words " Pitkään oleskelleen kolmannen maan kansalaisen EY-oleskelulupa" are on the keywords and I interpreted it to mean the applicant had one.

If the applicant had EC residence permit issued by Sweden, he/she could have bypassed the work force consideration phase

Do you have source for that claim? One that is better than the one below?

From government proposal for changing the Aliens Act:

Toisesta jäsenvaltiosta Suomeen työtä tekemään tulevaan pitkään oleskelleeseen kolmannen maan kansalaisen työntekoon sovellettaisiin samoja sääntöjä kuin muihinkin kolmannen maan kansalaisiin. Työntekoon sovellettaisiin työvoiman saatavuusharkintaa.

(Which kind makes me wonder why was this taken by the court at all - the lower administrative court had made a wrong decision?)

http://www.eduskunta.fi/valtiopaivaasiat/he+94/2006

[sy]

If the applicant had EC residence permit issued by Sweden, he/she could have bypassed the work force consideration phase

Do you have source for that claim? One that is better than the one below?

Sorry, I was wrong about this.

[network_engineer]

Thanks Sy for clarifying!

If it was indeed true, then the EC Permit would have no value at all! Or did I miss something?

[Rip]

It is easier to keep at least if you plan to move to another Eu country but still come back here someday. EC permit is EU legislation. It gives a qualified foreigner certain rights irrespective of what the national legislation about permanent permits is.

[cors187]

http://www.finlex.fi/fi/oikeus/kho/muut/2013/201300453
A Tunisian citizen that had been given the EC residence permit by Sweden had applied for a residence permit for an employed person. Permit had been denied as suitable work force had been considered being available in Finland and EEA area (and the permit granted by Sweden did not make the applicant part of that workforce). The earlier decision was confirmed to have been proper by the Supreme Administrative Court.

I didn't find the info from the decision that the applicant has the EC residence permit. It only mentions that Sweden has granted the (national) permanent residence permit to the applicant. Of course, with this permit only, the applicant is treated as any other fresh non-EU foreigners.

If the applicant had EC residence permit issued by Sweden, he/she could have bypassed the work force consideration phase.

I couldnt read the finlex in english, if i have got it right, the swedish resident wanted to be "work ready" as having (FIN SSNumber)+(taxcard) without having a work contract or any proposed work at all?

[Rip]

I couldnt read the finlex in english, if i have got it right, the swedish resident wanted to be "work ready" as having (FIN SSNumber)+(taxcard) without having a work contract or any proposed work at all?

He would have had a job, but the unemployment office said 'no' as it was not a kind job that could not have been filled by somebody from the EEA area. Even with his permit issued in Sweden he was not considered an existing member of a labour force but just a Tunisian prospective immigrant.