During a police control on the highway, in Saint Avold (France), on 11 December 1988, authorities stopped the appellant. It was ascertained that he transported in the car his mother-in-law, Algerian, who’s passport had expired six months prior.
The appellant confirmed to be aware of the irregular situation of his mother-in-law in France. He further acknowledged accommodating her. He justified his conduct with her debilitated health condition (diabetes and high blood pressure), which required her to be closely followed by a physician.
Legal findings:
The Court of First Instance of Sarreguemines (France) convicted the appellant of migrant smuggling, specifically facilitation of illegal stay. It sentenced the appellant to two months imprisonment suspended and a fine of 2000 Francs. The Court of Appeal of Metz (France) confirmed the decision on the merits but reviewed the penalty applied.
For further details see “History of Proceedings” and “Commentary”.
Комментарий и существенные особенности
The Court of Appeal of Metz (France) confirmed the decision of the Court of First Instance of Sarreguemines (France), thus convicting the appellant of migrant smuggling, in its modality of facilitation of illegal stay. In so doing, the Court considered that the appellant was aware of the irregular situation of his mother-in-law. By proving accommodation to her, he facilitated her illegal stay in the country, in the terms of Article 21 Ordonnance 45-2658 of 2 November 1945.
However, the Court of Appeal paid due care to the particular circumstances of the case and the special needs of the migrant. It thus reviewed the penalty by applying a full suspension thereof. That is, contrarily to the decision of he Court of First Instance of Serreguemines, the Court of Appeal suspended the execution of the fine (and not only of the imprisonment).
NOTE: As per French national law, the purpose of obtaining a financial or other material benefit is not a constitutive element of the crime but rather an aggravating circumstance (see SHERLOC Database on Legislation – France).
Дата вынесения приговора:
1989-10-04
Комплексные вопросы
Ответственность
... За
• Совершенное преступление
... основанная на
• Преступный умысел
... влечет
• Основной(ые) правонарушитель(ли)
Расследование
Участвующие учреждения
• Criminal Police
• Public Prosecutor
Информация процедурного характера
Правовая система:
Гражданское право
Последнее решение суда:
Апелляционный суд
Вид разбирательства:
Уголовный
On 19 May 1989, the Court of First Instance of Sarreguemines (France) convicted the appellant of migrant smuggling. It followed the appeal herein under analysis.
Мигранты
мигрант:
Пол:
Лицо женского пола
Гражданство:
null
Mother-in-law of the appellant. Debilitated health condition, requiring close medical follow-up.
Обвиняемые/ответчики
Обвиняемый:
M.D.
Пол:
Лицо мужского пола
Гражданство:
Родился:
1957
Правовые основания:
On appeal, the Defence argued the appellant had acted out of concern for the debilitated health of his mother-in-law who required close medical follow-up.
Обвинения / Иски / Решения
Обвиняемый:
M.D.
Обвинения:
Assisting the irregular entry, transit or stay of a foreigner in France
Статут:
Ordonnance 45-2658 of 2 November 1945Article 21
Приговор:
Guilty
Срок лишения свободы:
2 Месяцы
Probation
Штраф/выплата государству:
2000
Francs
(Up to 10,000 USD)
Execution suspended
Суд
Cour d'appel de Metz
Источники/ссылки
Cour d’Appel de Metz Jugement 767/89 4 October 1989
