The Hague: Noureddine Amrani

A Moroccan citizen residing in the Netherlands lost his legal residency status after tests revealed he was not the biological father of a child born in 2017. This also hindered his application for long-term residency status. However, a Dutch court recently overturned the latest administrative decision concerning his case. The man had held a residency permit since November 2016 based on his relationship with a woman identified in the ruling as "S." After the birth of their daughter in 2017 and the couple's separation in November 2019, his residency status in the Netherlands was modified. He was granted the right to remain in the Netherlands due to his relationship with the child, based on Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. However, paternity tests later proved that he was not the biological father of the child. Consequently, on January 8, 2024, the Dutch Minister of Immigration and Asylum retroactively revoked his residence permit, effective from October 20, 2023.

The Moroccan man appealed the decision, but after his appeal was rejected, he did not file a lawsuit, making the revocation final. Since January 2025, he has held a new residence permit, this time based on his family life with his current wife. This permit remains valid until 2030. He then applied for long-term EU residency status, but his application was rejected on May 21, 2025, as this status requires five years of continuous legal residence in the Netherlands.

However, the retroactive revocation created a gap of approximately one month between October 20 and November 21, 2023, leaving him without residency status, which was sufficient to break the required five-year period. In its ruling of September 4, 2026, the Hague Court affirmed that the Moroccan man had no legal right of residence during that month, and therefore the court could not simply disregard this interruption. However, it noted several problems in the way the Dutch authorities handled his application. Initially, the authorities considered the interruption period to be much longer, extending it to January 28, 2025. It was only during the proceedings that the minister admitted the actual period was only one month. Furthermore, it emerged that the authorities had changed their application of a rule that had remained unchanged since 2023. According to the court, the minister failed to provide a clear explanation for when this new policy was adopted, or for why similar cases had been treated differently previously. The authorities' response to the Moroccan man's insistence on the principle of equal treatment was also inadequate.

In addition, the authorities did not give the man an opportunity to present his case before rejecting his appeal, and the court found that his arguments were not so clearly invalid as to warrant a hearing. Consequently, the court overturned the decision of July 31, 2025, and ordered the minister to review the case again. It also ordered the Dutch state to pay €3,736 in legal fees. However, this legal victory remains limited in scope, as it does not overturn the previous residency revocation decision issued after the ancestry check, nor does it automatically grant him long-term EU resident status. The administration is now required to reassess his application, clearly justify its policy, and give him an opportunity to present his case.