CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 12 septembre 2024

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 30 September 2024   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 24837/24 Ahmed Kvadrani ABUKAR against Denmark lodged on 24 August 2024 communicated on 12 September 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant is a Somali national. He entered Denmark when he was 8   years old. He has a criminal past and has been warned several times that he may risk expulsion. By a High Court judgment which became final on 1   May   2024, the applicant was convicted of, inter alia , violence under aggravating circumstances and attempted robbery. He was sentenced to 2   years and 6   months’ imprisonment and his expulsion from Denmark was ordered, with a 12 ‑ year re ‑ entry ban. The applicant complained that the order expelling him from Denmark was in violation of Article 8 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Having regard, in particular, to the fact that the applicant was sentenced to 2 years and 6 months’ imprisonment, would the order to expel him from the country with a 12-year re-entry ban be in breach of Article 8 of the Convention (see, for example, Abdi v. Denmark , no. 41643/19, 14   September 2021)?   2.     Should weight be given, in the proportionality test under Article 8 of the Convention, to whether the applicant has any prospect of re-entering the country after the expiry of the re-entry ban? In the affirmative, are his prospects of being re-admitted to Denmark after the twelve ‑ year re-entry ban “purely theoretical” (see, among others, Savran v. Denmark [GC], no.   57467/15, § 200, 7 December 2021)?