Einreiseverbot
DE EN BKS
Menü
Entry ban

Article 8 ECHR: balancing family life against an entry ban

Article 8 ECHR protects family life: how the balancing of interests under section 9 BFA-VG works and how proportionality limits the duration of an entry ban under section 53 FPG.

Mag. Mirela Saric
Your contact person

Mag. Mirela Saric

Attorney at law · German and BCS

Mirela Saric assists clients in immigration matters with a clear structure: review the decision, secure deadlines, define the strategy and act quickly. She advises in German and Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian.

Call directly +43 662 6280000 WhatsApp Send email Book initial consultation (72 euros)
27 June 2026 · Mag. Mirela Saric, Attorney at Law

An entry ban often interferes deeply with a family. Anyone rooted in Austria loses not only the right to enter but also closeness to a spouse, partner or children. This is precisely where the protection of private and family life under Article 8 ECHR comes in.

The authority may impose an entry ban only where the public interest outweighs the personal ties. This balancing of interests is carried out under section 9 BFA-VG. It decides whether the interference with family life is proportionate and what duration of a ban is permissible at all.

The short self-check below helps you place your own situation. We then show how the balancing under Article 8 ECHR works and which ties carry particular weight.

Place your situation

How much does your family life weigh in the balancing?

Answer one or two questions about your ties in Austria. You will receive a first orientation on the balancing under Article 8 ECHR.

Already know you want to get in touch? Go straight to the enquiry form.

01 Question 1

What family ties exist in Austria?

Article 8 ECHR protects private and family life. The closer and more actively lived the tie, the more weight it carries in the balancing exercise.

All paths at a glance

Overview of all answers.

01

An established family relationship carries significant weight in the balancing.

A marriage or partnership lived over years with a shared household weighs heavily in the balancing exercise under section 9 BFA-VG. In such a case the public interest in an entry ban must be especially weighty for the interference with family life under Article 8 ECHR to remain proportionate. Document the relationship comprehensively.

Evidence such as a marriage certificate, a joint registration record and proof of everyday life strengthen the argument. Proportionality at the same time limits the permissible duration under section 53 FPG.

02

A settled private life can also tip the balance.

Alongside close family, Article 8 ECHR also protects private life. This includes social, professional and cultural ties formed in Austria. These ties must be taken into account in the balancing exercise under section 9 BFA-VG, even where there is no marriage or partnership.

Set out how deeply you are rooted in Austria. The denser the social network, the stronger the objection against a disproportionate entry ban and its duration under section 53 FPG.

03

Where ties are limited, other arguments matter.

Where the centre of life is abroad and there are hardly any ties in Austria, the protection of family life carries less weight in the balancing. This does not mean an entry ban is permissible without more. Even then the risk assessment and the duration set under section 53 FPG must be proportionate.

Check whether the authority captured the existing ties in full. Relationships are sometimes underestimated or not documented. A careful stocktaking provides clarity.

What Article 8 ECHR protects

Article 8 ECHR protects private and family life against disproportionate interference by the state. An entry ban is such an interference because it prevents the continuation of relationships lived in Austria. Protected are not only marriage and partnership but also the social and professional environment built up over years. A deeper explanation is offered by the entry on private and family life.

The interference is permissible only where it is provided for by law, necessary and proportionate. The authority must therefore weigh the public interest in the measure against the personal ties of the person concerned. This balancing is the core of any legal review of an entry ban.

The closer and more stable the tie, the higher the threshold for a lawful interference. A family relationship lived over years with a shared household requires a particularly careful justification.

The balancing under section 9 BFA-VG and the duration

The balancing of interests is carried out under section 9 BFA-VG. It sets the public interest in the measure against the private interests of the person concerned. Among the factors considered are the length of stay, the degree of integration, family ties and whether private and family life arose at a time when the stay was insecure.

Where the balancing comes out in favour of the person concerned, the entry ban may be impermissible or at least due to be shortened in its duration. Proportionality limits the duration set under section 53 FPG, because the measure may not go beyond what is necessary to achieve its purpose. How the limits of the duration are reviewed is explained by the focus page on family and private life under the ECHR.

An appeal against the decision of the BFA goes to the Federal Administrative Court. It should set out concretely why the authority underestimated the family ties or measured the duration disproportionately.

Important on documentation: Family ties only have effect where they are evidenced. Gather a marriage certificate, a joint registration record, proof of everyday life and of length of stay early on. The more concretely the balancing is prepared, the stronger the objection against a disproportionate entry ban. When in doubt arrange an initial consultation (72 euros) quickly.

FAQ

Article 8 ECHR and the entry ban.

Does Article 8 ECHR also protect against an entry ban? +

Yes. Article 8 ECHR protects private and family life against disproportionate interference. An entry ban interferes with this right and is permissible only where the public interest outweighs the personal ties. The balancing is carried out under section 9 BFA-VG and also affects the permissible duration.

Which ties carry weight in the balancing? +

Marriage, partnership, children as well as social and professional ties in Austria are taken into account. The length of stay and the degree of integration also play a role. The closer and more stable the relationship, the more heavily it weighs against the public interest in the measure.

Can proportionality limit the duration of the ban? +

Yes. The duration set under section 53 FPG must be proportionate. Where the family ties prevail, the entry ban may be impermissible or due to be shortened in its duration. The measure may not go beyond what is necessary to achieve its purpose.

Go deeper

Related topics and terms

Family and private life under the ECHR

How the protection under Article 8 ECHR works in the balancing.

Private and family life

What exactly falls under the protection of Article 8 ECHR.

Proportionality

How proportionality limits the duration of an entry ban.

Topics
Entry banArticle 8 ECHRFamily lifeProportionality

Entry ban, return decision, a running appeal deadline?

In immigration law, deadlines and the right argumentation decide. Call us directly or send an email, callback within one business day.

+43 662 6280000 [email protected] Book initial consultation (72 euros)
Contact

A direct line to the firm.

Address

BRANDAUER Rechtsanwälte GmbH Giselakai 51 5020 Salzburg