Migration Jurisprudence from the South › Denmark
Biao v. Denmark (Grand Chamber)
European Court of Human Rights · Denmark · 2016-05-24 · Regional court or body
Citation: App. no. 38590/10
Type of case: Constitutional and human rights
Outcome: Decided for the migrant side
Question
Does a family reunification rule that favours people who have been citizens for 28 years discriminate?
What the court decided
Yes. The 28-year rule had a disproportionate effect on naturalised citizens of foreign ethnic origin and amounted to indirect discrimination.
In plain language
A Danish citizen born in Togo could not bring his wife from Ghana, while citizens by birth could. The Grand Chamber said the rule indirectly discriminated against naturalised citizens.
Dalam bahasa sederhana
Seorang warga Denmark kelahiran Togo tidak bisa membawa istrinya dari Ghana, sementara warga sejak lahir bisa. Majelis Agung menyatakan aturan itu secara tidak langsung mendiskriminasi warga hasil naturalisasi.
Pertanyaan: Apakah aturan penyatuan keluarga yang menguntungkan orang yang sudah 28 tahun menjadi warga negara bersifat diskriminatif?
What happened afterwards
- 2016-05-24: Judgment.
- 2018: Rule amended. [Check.]
Sources
Open this decision in the interactive collection (compare, filter, Indonesian view, downloads).
Cite as: Institute for Migrant Rights (2026), Migration Jurisprudence from the South, version 0.1, https://theimr.org/court-decisions/d/echr-biao-2016/. This page summarizes a court decision for research and advocacy; it is not legal advice.