News

Removal of a foreign national: when deciding (or reconsidering) the removal of a foreign national from Lithuania and imposing a re-entry ban, the Migration Department was required to properly assess the individual circumstances of the person concerned, particularly in the context of the best interests of the child.

By its ruling of 6 August 2025, the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania examined a dispute concerning a decision of the Migration Department in which the Department reconsidered whether a foreign national should be removed from Lithuania and prohibited from re-entering the country. The Court found that the administrative decision lacked proper reasoning.

The case established that, by a decision adopted in 2021, the Migration Department had refused the foreign national’s application for asylum, had ordered his removal from Lithuania, and had imposed a ban on his re-entry. After the factual circumstances changed, the foreign national submitted a request to the Migration Department in 2024 asking for the 2021 decision to be reconsidered. He argued that the decision had not been enforced for three years, that in 2024 he had a son with a citizen of the Republic of Lithuania (the child also being a Lithuanian citizen), and that he had been employed in Lithuania since 2022. The Migration Department partially granted the request by shortening the duration of the entry ban, but it did not amend the part of the 2021 decision ordering his removal.

Disagreeing with this outcome, the foreign national appealed to the court. He argued that the decision would separate him from his child, thereby violating the principle of the primacy of the best interests of the child, and that the Department had failed to assess highly relevant and significant individual circumstances. He stressed that his presence in Lithuania was essential to provide care for his child, and that the Migration Department had not properly assessed the child’s relationship with his father nor the other related circumstances.

In examining the parties’ arguments, the Supreme Administrative Court of Lithuania considered the relevant provisions of Lithuanian law, as well as applicable European Union law, the requirements of the European Convention on Human Rights, and related case-law. On this basis, the Court concluded that, when deciding (or reconsidering) the removal of a foreign national and imposing a re-entry ban, the Migration Department was required to assess the individual circumstances of the foreign national — that is, to consider all available documents, data and the full set of family circumstances.

The Court held that, in light of the facts established in the case, the reconsidered decision on removal and the re-entry ban had not been proportionate in terms of safeguarding the best interests of the child. After the 2021 decision was adopted, the applicant’s family situation had fundamentally changed: his young child had formed an emotional bond with both parents, and the foreign national contributed to the wellbeing and support of the family. In the contested decision, the Migration Department merely noted the factual circumstances of the child’s birth and the formation of the family, but did not evaluate or individualise these circumstances in terms of family ties. The Court therefore concluded that the Migration Department had not sufficiently assessed the fact that, after the 2021 decision, the foreign national had had a child with a Lithuanian citizen and was raising and supporting that child, ensuring his full development, emotional wellbeing and social stability. The contested decision contained no information showing that an assessment had been carried out of the consequences that could arise from severing the relationship between the foreign national and his infant child if he were removed from Lithuania — that is, of the impact of separating the family when viewed through the lens of the child’s best interests.

Administrative case number eA-2352-520/2025