mercoledì 10 giugno 2026
تصريح العمل وتصريح الإقامة: ماذا يحدث إذا تغيّر صاحب العمل؟ مرحبًا بكم في حلقة جديدة من بودكاست “قانون الهجرة”. أنا المحامي فابيو لوسيربو، واليوم سنتحدث عن حكم حديث صادر عن المحكمة الإدارية الإقليمية في إيميليا رومانيا يتعلق بتحويل تصريح الإقامة من التدريب المهني إلى العمل، مع التركيز بشكل خاص على تصريح العمل الإيطالي المعروف باسم “Nulla Osta”. تتناول هذه القضية مسألة شائعة جدًا في إجراءات الهجرة: ماذا يحدث عندما يحصل العامل الأجنبي على تصريح عمل لصاحب عمل معيّن، ثم يبدأ العمل لاحقًا لدى شركة أخرى. في القضية التي نظرت فيها المحكمة، كان المواطن الأجنبي قد حصل على الـ “Nulla Osta” لتحويل تصريح الإقامة ووقّع عقد الإقامة مع صاحب عمل محدد، لكنه بعد ذلك بدأ علاقة عمل مع شركة مختلفة. وبناءً على ذلك، أعلنت إدارة الهجرة في مدينة فورلي عدم قبول طلب تحويل تصريح الإقامة إلى تصريح عمل. ووفقًا للمحكمة الإدارية، فإن تصريح العمل يرتبط بشكل مباشر بصاحب العمل الذي بدأ الإجراءات الإدارية. ولهذا السبب، خاصة في المرحلة الأولى، يجب أن يكون هناك تطابق بين صاحب العمل الذي طلب التصريح، وعقد الإقامة، وعلاقة العمل الفعلية مع العامل الأجنبي. كما أوضح القضاة أن هذا التفسير يهدف إلى منع إساءة استخدام نظام الهجرة، خصوصًا في الحالات التي يتم فيها فتح الإجراءات دون وجود نية حقيقية لتوظيف العامل الأجنبي. لكن هناك جانب مهم آخر. فقد أكدت المحكمة أن مقدم الطلب لم يقدم أي تفسير واضح حول أسباب عدم بدء علاقة العمل الأولى بشكل فعلي. وهنا غالبًا تكمن النقطة الأساسية في الدفاع القانوني: توثيق أسباب تغيير صاحب العمل، وإثبات استمرارية العمل، وشرح ما حدث بدقة أثناء الإجراءات الإدارية. إلى هنا تنتهي حلقتنا اليوم. أنا المحامي فابيو لوسيربو، وكان هذا حلقة جديدة من بودكاست “قانون الهجر تصريح العمل وتصريح الإقامة: ماذا يحدث إذا تغيّر صاحب العمل؟ مرحبًا بكم في حلقة جديدة من بودكاست “قانون الهجرة”. أنا المحامي فابيو لوسيربو، واليوم سنتحدث عن حكم حديث صادر عن المحكمة الإدارية الإقليمية في إيميليا رومانيا يتعلق بتحويل تصريح الإقامة من التدريب المهني إلى العمل، مع التركيز بشكل خاص على تصريح العمل الإيطالي المعروف باسم “Nulla Osta”. تتناول هذه القضية مسألة شائعة جدًا في إجراءات الهجرة: ماذا يحدث عندما يحصل العامل الأجنبي على تصريح عمل لصاحب عمل معيّن، ثم يبدأ العمل لاحقًا لدى شركة أخرى. في القضية التي نظرت فيها المحكمة، كان المواطن الأجنبي قد حصل على الـ “Nulla Osta” لتحويل تصريح الإقامة ووقّع عقد الإقامة مع صاحب عمل محدد، لكنه بعد ذلك بدأ علاقة عمل مع شركة مختلفة. وبناءً على ذلك، أعلنت إدارة الهجرة في مدينة فورلي عدم قبول طلب تحويل تصريح الإقامة إلى تصريح عمل. ووفقًا للمحكمة الإدارية، فإن تصريح العمل يرتبط بشكل مباشر بصاحب العمل الذي بدأ الإجراءات الإدارية. ولهذا السبب، خاصة في المرحلة الأولى، يجب أن يكون هناك تطابق بين صاحب العمل الذي طلب التصريح، وعقد الإقامة، وعلاقة العمل الفعلية مع العامل الأجنبي. كما أوضح القضاة أن هذا التفسير يهدف إلى منع إساءة استخدام نظام الهجرة، خصوصًا في الحالات التي يتم فيها فتح الإجراءات دون وجود نية حقيقية لتوظيف العامل الأجنبي. لكن هناك جانب مهم آخر. فقد أكدت المحكمة أن مقدم الطلب لم يقدم أي تفسير واضح حول أسباب عدم بدء علاقة العمل الأولى بشكل فعلي. وهنا غالبًا تكمن النقطة الأساسية في الدفاع القانوني: توثيق أسباب تغيير صاحب العمل، وإثبات استمرارية العمل، وشرح ما حدث بدقة أثناء الإجراءات الإدارية. إلى هنا تنتهي حلقتنا اليوم. أنا المحامي فابيو لوسيربو، وكان هذا حلقة جديدة من بودكاست “قانون الهجر https://ift.tt/qDROzgr https://p16-common-sign.tiktokcdn-eu.com/tos-no1a-p-0037-no/ogCR6qhHEwQcAFuA8AkEAgFz18AECJDeCIrfVY~tplv-tiktokx-cropcenter-q:300:400:q70.jpeg?dr=9232&refresh_token=bb064281&x-expires=1781193600&x-signature=hMfhzIBT5nLgQTlYwF1wsId%2FDYg%3D&t=bacd0480&ps=933b5bde&shp=d05b14bd&shcp=8aecc5ac&idc=no1a&s=TIKTOK_FOR_DEVELOPER&sc=cover&biz_tag=tt_video
via Avv. Fabio Loscerbo https://ift.tt/z8EfDic
martedì 9 giugno 2026
https://ift.tt/8VCHI53 Ascolta "Work Permit Clearance and Residence Permit: what happens if the employer changes?" su Spreaker. https://ift.tt/2Qi0Nsu
via Avv. Fabio Loscerbo https://ift.tt/z8EfDic
Italian Court Confirms Strict Link Between Work Permit Clearance and Employer in Residence Permit Conversions https://ift.tt/u15EAWG Italian Court Confirms Strict Link Between Work Permit Clearance and Employer in Residence Permit Conversions A recent ruling issued by the Regional Administrative Court of Emilia-Romagna has drawn attention to one of the most delicate aspects of the Italian immigration system: the relationship between the work permit clearance, known as the “nulla osta”, and the employer who initiated the immigration procedure. The judgment, published on 21 May 2026, concerns a foreign national who had entered the Italian administrative process for the conversion of a residence permit from internship status to subordinate employment. The case arose after the worker obtained a work permit clearance through a specific employer and signed the required residence contract before the Immigration Desk. However, the original employment relationship never actually started. The worker later began employment with a different company. Following this change, the Immigration Office of Forlì declared the application for the work residence permit inadmissible, arguing that the employer who initiated the procedure and signed the residence contract was not the same employer who ultimately hired the foreign worker. The Administrative Court upheld the position of the authorities. According to the judges, the Italian immigration framework requires continuity between the employer requesting the work permit clearance, the residence contract, and the actual employment relationship established with the foreign national. The Court also stressed that this interpretation serves a broader purpose: preventing abuses of the immigration system and avoiding situations where procedures are initiated without a genuine intention to employ the worker. The ruling reflects a traditional approach deeply rooted in the structure of the Italian immigration system, where the employer plays a central role in sponsoring the foreign worker’s entry and regularization process. At the same time, the decision highlights the growing tension between rigid administrative procedures and the realities of the modern labour market. Today’s employment landscape is often unstable and highly flexible. Temporary contracts, subcontracting systems, business closures, and rapid job changes are increasingly common. In this context, tying a foreign worker’s immigration status too strictly to a single employer may create significant vulnerabilities. Interestingly, the Court placed considerable emphasis on one specific detail: the applicant had failed to provide any concrete explanation regarding why the original employment relationship had never started. This aspect may prove decisive in future litigation. A foreign worker who can properly document the reasons behind a change of employer — while demonstrating continuity of employment and social integration — could potentially distinguish his or her case from the restrictive interpretation adopted in this judgment. The ruling therefore sends a clear message to both foreign workers and immigration lawyers: in Italy’s current administrative framework, the procedural consistency of the “nulla osta” pathway remains a central issue in residence permit conversions. Avv. Fabio Loscerbo ORCID: https://ift.tt/xKQyhet https://ift.tt/2Qi0Nsu
via Avv. Fabio Loscerbo https://ift.tt/z8EfDic
Signalement SIS et refus de visa : pas de refus automatiques https://ift.tt/8fjmtZu https://ift.tt/2Qi0Nsu
via Avv. Fabio Loscerbo https://ift.tt/z8EfDic
lunedì 8 giugno 2026
SIS Alert and Visa Refusal: No Automatic Denials https://ift.tt/SCV80MI https://ift.tt/PwJxraV
via Avv. Fabio Loscerbo https://ift.tt/mIrzYt1
New on TikTok: SIS Alert and Visa Refusal: Entry Visas Cannot Be Denied Automatically Welcome to a new episode of the podcast “Immigration Law”. I am attorney Fabio Loscerbo, and today we will discuss an increasingly important issue in European immigration law: the relationship between SIS alerts and the refusal of entry visas. Many people discover the existence of a Schengen Information System alert, the so-called SIS alert, only when an Italian consulate rejects their visa application. This frequently happens with study visas, work visas, or family reunification visas. For years, in many cases, the existence of an SIS alert was treated almost as an automatic ground for refusal. But recent case law is now changing this approach significantly. An important judgment issued by the Regional Administrative Court of Lazio, Second Bis Section, published on May 6, 2026, annulled the refusal of a study visa issued by the Italian Consulate in Istanbul against a student who had been flagged in the SIS by Greece. The Court clarified that it is not enough to generically refer to the existence of an SIS alert in order to deny a visa. The administration must instead carry out a concrete, individual, and proportionate assessment of the foreign national’s situation. The decision also refers to the recent Constitutional Court judgment number 6 of 2026, which affirmed a very important principle: an SIS alert does not automatically prevent the issuance of a residence permit or an entry visa. According to EU Regulation number 1861 of 2018, Member States must consult each other and verify whether the foreign national actually represents a current threat to public order or public security. This means that a consulate cannot simply say: “there is an SIS alert, therefore the visa is refused.” A real investigation is required. A genuine statement of reasons is required. A concrete assessment of the applicant’s personal situation is required. This is a very important development because it opens new avenues of protection for individuals whose visas were denied solely because of a Schengen alert. In the coming years, the SIS system will become increasingly central in European immigration law and in the balance between security, freedom of movement, and individual rights. Thank you for listening to this new episode of the podcast “Immigration Law”. I am attorney Fabio Loscerbo, and I will see you in the next episode. https://ift.tt/DZVTj7N https://ift.tt/nTM4dri https://ift.tt/PwJxraV
via Avv. Fabio Loscerbo https://ift.tt/mIrzYt1
SIS Alert and Visa Refusal: Entry Visas Cannot Be Denied Automatically Welcome to a new episode of the podcast “Immigration Law”. I am attorney Fabio Loscerbo, and today we will discuss an increasingly important issue in European immigration law: the relationship between SIS alerts and the refusal of entry visas. Many people discover the existence of a Schengen Information System alert, the so-called SIS alert, only when an Italian consulate rejects their visa application. This frequently happens with study visas, work visas, or family reunification visas. For years, in many cases, the existence of an SIS alert was treated almost as an automatic ground for refusal. But recent case law is now changing this approach significantly. An important judgment issued by the Regional Administrative Court of Lazio, Second Bis Section, published on May 6, 2026, annulled the refusal of a study visa issued by the Italian Consulate in Istanbul against a student who had been flagged in the SIS by Greece. The Court clarified that it is not enough to generically refer to the existence of an SIS alert in order to deny a visa. The administration must instead carry out a concrete, individual, and proportionate assessment of the foreign national’s situation. The decision also refers to the recent Constitutional Court judgment number 6 of 2026, which affirmed a very important principle: an SIS alert does not automatically prevent the issuance of a residence permit or an entry visa. According to EU Regulation number 1861 of 2018, Member States must consult each other and verify whether the foreign national actually represents a current threat to public order or public security. This means that a consulate cannot simply say: “there is an SIS alert, therefore the visa is refused.” A real investigation is required. A genuine statement of reasons is required. A concrete assessment of the applicant’s personal situation is required. This is a very important development because it opens new avenues of protection for individuals whose visas were denied solely because of a Schengen alert. In the coming years, the SIS system will become increasingly central in European immigration law and in the balance between security, freedom of movement, and individual rights. Thank you for listening to this new episode of the podcast “Immigration Law”. I am attorney Fabio Loscerbo, and I will see you in the next episode. SIS Alert and Visa Refusal: Entry Visas Cannot Be Denied Automatically Welcome to a new episode of the podcast “Immigration Law”. I am attorney Fabio Loscerbo, and today we will discuss an increasingly important issue in European immigration law: the relationship between SIS alerts and the refusal of entry visas. Many people discover the existence of a Schengen Information System alert, the so-called SIS alert, only when an Italian consulate rejects their visa application. This frequently happens with study visas, work visas, or family reunification visas. For years, in many cases, the existence of an SIS alert was treated almost as an automatic ground for refusal. But recent case law is now changing this approach significantly. An important judgment issued by the Regional Administrative Court of Lazio, Second Bis Section, published on May 6, 2026, annulled the refusal of a study visa issued by the Italian Consulate in Istanbul against a student who had been flagged in the SIS by Greece. The Court clarified that it is not enough to generically refer to the existence of an SIS alert in order to deny a visa. The administration must instead carry out a concrete, individual, and proportionate assessment of the foreign national’s situation. The decision also refers to the recent Constitutional Court judgment number 6 of 2026, which affirmed a very important principle: an SIS alert does not automatically prevent the issuance of a residence permit or an entry visa. According to EU Regulation number 1861 of 2018, Member States must consult each other and verify whether the foreign national actually represents a current threat to public order or public security. This means that a consulate cannot simply say: “there is an SIS alert, therefore the visa is refused.” A real investigation is required. A genuine statement of reasons is required. A concrete assessment of the applicant’s personal situation is required. This is a very important development because it opens new avenues of protection for individuals whose visas were denied solely because of a Schengen alert. In the coming years, the SIS system will become increasingly central in European immigration law and in the balance between security, freedom of movement, and individual rights. Thank you for listening to this new episode of the podcast “Immigration Law”. I am attorney Fabio Loscerbo, and I will see you in the next episode. https://ift.tt/nTM4dri https://p16-common-sign.tiktokcdn-eu.com/tos-no1a-p-0037-no/oA8CrUdVAwfQEeEeLAgXsHp8HqXASWQMFhIDoX~tplv-tiktokx-cropcenter-q:300:400:q70.jpeg?dr=9232&refresh_token=79315144&x-expires=1781024400&x-signature=aAFAsd3rjFGB3LhKkCbZDawyAHo%3D&t=bacd0480&ps=933b5bde&shp=d05b14bd&shcp=8aecc5ac&idc=no1a&biz_tag=tt_video&s=TIKTOK_FOR_DEVELOPER&sc=cover
via Avv. Fabio Loscerbo https://ift.tt/mIrzYt1
Iscriviti a:
Post (Atom)