sabato 24 gennaio 2026

بيان إعلامي – حلقات جديدة من بودكاست “Diritto dell’Immigrazione”

 بيان إعلامي – حلقات جديدة من بودكاست “Diritto dell’Immigrazione”

تم نشر حلقات جديدة من بودكاست “Diritto dell’Immigrazione” مخصصة لقضايا راهنة وأساسية في قانون الهجرة، مع معالجة دقيقة للجوانب القانونية الموضوعية والإجرائية ذات الصلة.

1) رفض تصريح العمل وحق الطعن

تتناول سلسلة من الحلقات باللغات المختلفة المبدأ القانوني القائل بأن العامل الأجنبي، في حالة رفض تصريح العمل، لا يملك صفة مستقلة للطعن في القرار أمام القضاء.

2) تصريح الإقامة لأسباب صحية وتحويله إلى تصريح للعمل

تتناول هذه الحلقات شروط منح تصريح الإقامة لأسباب صحية وإمكانية تحويله إلى تصريح إقامة للعمل، مع تحليل حدود السلطة التقديرية للإدارة والضمانات المرتبطة بحماية الحقوق الأساسية.

3) الإقامة الاختيارية وإلغاء الرفض القائم فقط على غياب التأشيرة

تحلل هذه السلسلة قراراً حديثاً صادراً عن المحكمة الإدارية في إقليم كامبانيا قضى بإلغاء قرار الرفض الذي استند حصراً إلى عدم وجود تأشيرة دخول، مع توضيح الحدود الصحيحة لتطبيق القانون الإداري في هذا المجال.

دعوة للاستماع والمشاركة

ندعو المهنيين في المجال القانوني والباحثين وجميع المهتمين بقانون الهجرة إلى الاستماع إلى هذه الحلقات الجديدة ومشاركتها، لما تتضمنه من تحليل قانوني محدث ومفيد للممارسة العملية.

alle

Nessun commento:

Posta un commento

Iscriviti a: Commenti sul post (Atom)

New on TikTok: Seasonal Work Permit and Right to be Heard: Italian Administrative Court Annuls Police Decision Welcome to a new episode of the podcast “Immigration Law”. I am Attorney Fabio Loscerbo, and today we discuss an important decision of the Italian administrative court concerning seasonal work permits and the right of a foreign national to participate in the administrative procedure. I am referring to the judgment of the Regional Administrative Court for the Marche Region (TAR Marche), Section II, number 292 of 2026, issued in case number 137 of 2026 and published on March 4, 2026. The case concerns a foreign national who entered Italy legally with a seasonal work visa valid for 270 days. However, once in Italy, he was unable to sign the residence contract with the employer indicated in the work authorization. For this reason, the Police Headquarters declared inadmissible the application for a residence permit for subordinate work – pending employment, arguing that the failure to establish the employment relationship automatically prevented the issuance of a residence permit. The Administrative Court did not agree with this approach. The central issue of the decision concerns the lack of prior notice of rejection required by Article 10-bis of Law No. 241 of 1990, which governs administrative procedures in Italy. According to the court, when a public administration intends to adopt a negative decision, such as the denial of a residence permit, it must first inform the applicant of the reasons that could lead to the rejection of the request. This notice allows the applicant to submit observations or additional documents in order to defend their position. In this case, that procedural guarantee was not respected. The declaration of inadmissibility had, in practice, the same effect as a denial of the residence permit, but without allowing the applicant to participate in the administrative process and provide explanations. For this reason, the TAR Marche upheld the appeal and annulled the decision of the Police Headquarters. At the same time, the court clarified that it did not rule on the merits of the residence permit itself. The administration must now re-examine the case following the correct procedural rules. This judgment confirms an important principle of administrative law: even in immigration procedures, the right to participate in the administrative process and to be heard before a negative decision is taken is a fundamental guarantee. Thank you for listening to this episode of the podcast “Immigration Law”. I am Attorney Fabio Loscerbo, and I will see you in the next episode.

https://ift.tt/xoPJkCG