English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This article critiques the European Court of Human Rights’ approach towards assessing asylum seekers’ right to respect for private and family life under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights in the context of their expulsion. In balancing the right of the individual against the public interest, it is argued that the court’s case law follows a static perspective. The rigidly defined assumption that the public interest lies in enforcing migration control and that the societal contributions of asylum seekers cannot influence the strength of the public interest is prevalent in jurisprudence yet underexplored in scholarship. The article uses the case of asylum seekers who contribute to a country’s economy to demonstrate that the court currently fails to appreciate the interdependence between these interests. It then suggests a path by which the court’s approach might be adjusted towards more nuance, ultimately allowing the contributions of asylum seekers to European communities to be appropriately reflected in legal determinations.

The Limits of Static Interests: Appreciating Asylum Seekers’ Contributions to a Country’s Economy in Article 8 ECHR Adjudication on Expulsion