After holding a residence and work permit for a total of four years, BA applied for a continued permit. The Swedish Migration Board refused BA permanent residence permit because it was not considered to have shown that he has taken vacation or received holiday benefits in accordance with Swedish law or collective agreements.

The Migration Supreme Court finds that the right to holiday benefits under the Vacation Act applies equally to all kinds of workers, both foreign and Swedish. Therefore, according to the Migration Supreme Court, the purpose of refusing employers who wish to exploit foreign labor would not serve the purpose of granting a continued residence permit for work and instead expel a foreign worker for not receiving the right holiday benefits. Against this background, the Migration Supreme Court considers that statutory holiday benefits during previous permit periods are not a prerequisite for granting a BA residence permit.

It has also not emerged other than that the supply requirement according to Chapter 6. Section 2, first paragraph, of the Aliens Act has been fulfilled and that the other conditions for BA’s employment have not been worse than the conditions that result from collective agreements or practices in the profession or industry. The Migration Supreme Court approves the appeal and grants BA a permanent residence permit.

Migration Supreme Court UM 7549–18

Law: 5 kap 5 § utlänningslagen (2005:716), UtlL

Keywords: Vacation, holiday allowance, Holiday pay, Migration Board, deportation, work permit