Expulsion

Justices: Øie, Matheson, Bull, Kallerud, Steinsvik

A female asylum seeker had upon arrival stated an incorrect country of origin, presented false identification documents and a false statement regarding the basis for asylum. After her application for asylum was rejected, she was granted residence based on matrimony, and she had four children with her husband. After 10 years of residence, her identity and country of origin were revealed, and the immigration authorities decided to expel the woman for two years, see section 66 subsection 1 a of the Immigration Act. The Supreme Court found that the expulsion was not a disproportionate measure towards the children. The violations were very serious. She had no legitimate expectation of residence in Norway or of establishing a protected family life here. There was no insurmountable hindrance for continuing the family life in the country of origin. Although the expulsion would be difficult to the children, there was no information that this would exceed what must be expected in such a situation. There were no extraordinary circumstances like in the cases where the European Court of Human Rights has established violation of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Against this background, the Supreme Court could not see that the children would be subjected to unreasonable burdens, or that there were extraordinary circumstances implying that two years' expulsion would be a disproportionate measure towards any of the children, see section 70 of the Immigration Act, Article 8 of the Convention of Human Rights and Article 3 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Judgment was given in favour of the State represented by the Immigration Appeal Board.