SAC: stricter interpretation of conditions for residence under ‘other’ category
In its recent judgment (2 Azs 64/2024), the Supreme Administrative Court confirmed that the purpose of residence under the ‘other’ category must have a sufficiently strong, close and genuine connection to the Czech Republic. The mere fact that a foreign national’s activity takes place in the Czech Republic and requires their long-term presence is no longer sufficient, according to the court.
The case concerned a foreign national who originally resided in the Czech Republic under a long-term residence permit for the purpose of studying in Brno. After he ceased to meet the conditions for that residence, he applied for a new permit under the ‘other purpose’ category—specifically for the purpose of educational activities that do not qualify as studies under the Foreign Nationals Residence Act.
He stated that the purpose of his residence was an intensive English-language course comprising 20 lesson hours per week. The Ministry of the Interior rejected the application on the grounds that studying English did not constitute a sufficient purpose of residence to justify a long-term stay in the Czech Republic. This conclusion was subsequently upheld by the Commission for Decision-Making in Matters of Residence of Foreign Nationals.
The Regional Court in Brno, by contrast, agreed with the foreign national. In the court’s view, he had sufficiently substantiated the purpose of his residence because the educational activity was time-intensive and required his presence in the Czech Republic for more than three months. The court also noted that the administrative authorities had previously accepted similar language courses as a purpose of residence.
The SAC, however, disagreed with the Regional Court’s approach. It set aside the judgment, relying on the conclusions of its extended chamber that not every activity taking place in the Czech Republic is sufficient. A purpose of residence not expressly regulated by law must have a sufficiently strong, close and genuine connection with the Czech Republic. The court also emphasised that English can be studied virtually anywhere in the world, including in the applicant’s country of origin, and that studying English in an English-speaking country would be a more logical course of action. It therefore concluded that the stated English course was not a sufficient reason for granting long-term residence.
The SAC also addressed the previous administrative practice and the foreign national’s legitimate expectations referred to by the Regional Court. It recalled that the legitimate expectations of parties to proceedings are not absolute and are limited, in particular, by the principle of legality. A person cannot require an administrative authority to continue a previous practice if that practice is found to have been contrary to law. Accordingly, even if the administrative authorities had approved similar applications in the past, that fact alone does not create an entitlement to the same decision in the future.
This decision is important for applicants for long-term residence under the ‘other’ category, particularly in relation to other educational activities that do not themselves qualify as studies. The SAC confirmed that merely documenting a course or another activity taking place in the Czech Republic will no longer be sufficient; applicants will be required to demonstrate a genuine and sufficiently strong connection with the Czech environment.