Even before the amendment to the law in July 2025, family reunification for beneficiaries of subsidiary protection was severely restricted. In practice, a maximum of 1,000 visas could be issued per month. With the new regulation, this limited reunification has been largely suspended until July 23, 2027. Exceptions are only provided for in cases of particular hardship.
Who is affected by the suspension of family reunification?
The legal basis for this can be found in Section 104 (14) of the Residence Act. According to this, the regulation applies exclusively to persons with subsidiary protection. These are people who have neither been recognized as refugees within the meaning of the Geneva Refugee Convention nor been granted asylum, but who nevertheless face serious dangers such as torture, the death penalty, or other serious human rights violations in their country of origin.
According to the Central Register of Foreigners, around 381,000 people with subsidiary protection were living in Germany in mid-2025, including around 296,000 from Syria. For these individuals, the suspension means that they cannot legally bring their closest family members to Germany for the time being—unless there is a recognized case of hardship.
However, recognized refugees, persons entitled to asylum, and persons with a settlement permit are not affected. Settlement permit or an EU Blue Card. For these groups, family reunification remains possible in principle.
The case: Family applies for family reunification from Jordan
The current proceedings concerned a Syrian family that has been living legally in Jordan for more than 13 years. In December 2024, the wife and several minor children applied for family reunification visas at the German embassy in Amman. The husband and father had entered Germany in October 2022 and had been granted subsidiary protection at the beginning of 2023.
However, the responsible Foreigners' office the German Embassy rejected the visa applications in April 2025. Among other things, they stated that the applicants did not have sufficient means of support, did not have enough living space available, and could continue to live together as a family in a third country—in this case, Jordan.
The family appealed against these decisions. While the proceedings were still ongoing, the suspension of family reunification came into effect.
Court: The current legal situation is always decisive
First, the Berlin Administrative Court ruled that , in principle , the legal situation prevailing at the time of the decision applies to lawsuits concerning the issuance of visas . This means that even though the family's applications had been submitted before the change in the law, the court had to apply the new regulation.
Since family reunification for beneficiaries of subsidiary protection had already been suspended at the time of the court ruling, the court therefore saw no longer any legal basis for the visas applied for. Normal family reunification under Section 36a of the Residence Act was therefore no longer an option.
Does the suspension violate EU law or the Basic Law?
However, the central issue addressed by the court was a different one: the family argued that suspending family reunification violated EU law and the German Basic Law.
Explanation: In most cases, EU law takes precedence over German law. This means that if German law and EU law conflict, German law may not generally be applied. This so-called priority of application also applies to federal laws such as the Residence Act.
In the case of the Syrian family, however, the court concluded that suspending family reunification did not violate EU law. Neither EU law nor the European Convention on Human Rights obliges Germany to allow beneficiaries of subsidiary protection to bring their families to Germany. The relevant EU rules primarily concern recognized refugees, but not beneficiaries of subsidiary protection in the same way.
The court also ruled that suspending family reunification does not violate the German Basic Law. Although marriage and family enjoy special protection under Article 6 of the Basic Law, this does not automatically entitle individuals to family reunification. The legislature may impose time limits on family reunification if there are objective reasons for doing so and if there are still opportunities to take special hardship cases into account.
The court also referred to earlier decisions on the suspension of family reunification from 2016 onwards. These regulations had also been deemed constitutional at the time.
Important: The suspension does not mean complete exclusion without exceptions. Humanitarian regulations, such as those in Sections 22 and 23 of the Residence Act, continue to apply. In very special cases, a Residence permit may also be Residence permit during the suspension.
No special protection for applications already submitted
The plaintiff family argued that their applications had already been submitted before the law came into force. However, the court did not consider this to be a special case of protection of legitimate expectations. It is legally permissible for laws to change during ongoing proceedings. There is no fundamental right to expect legal regulations to remain unchanged.
The law does not contain any transitional provisions. Although the Berlin Administrative Court ruled that certain cases (e.g., invitations to collect visas that had already been issued) should be exempt, the family did not fall into this category.
Why no hardship case was recognized
The Berlin Administrative Court also examined whether family reunification would be possible on humanitarian grounds pursuant to Section 22 of the Residence Act, for example due to a particular personal emergency. However, this would require very serious individual circumstances.
In the court's opinion, this was not the case in this specific instance. The family has been living in Jordan for many years, receives support there, and stated that they do not have any serious illnesses or disabilities.
Furthermore, the court saw no compelling reason why family life should be conducted exclusively in Germany. It pointed out that the situation in Syria had changed following the fall of the Assad regime and that family reunification was in principle also possible there.
Overall, the VG Berlin therefore concluded that there was no particular hardship in this case.
What does the ruling mean for those affected?
The ruling confirms the current legal situation: family reunification with beneficiaries of subsidiary protection has been suspended for two years since July 24, 2025, and will not be possible until July 23, 2027. Even before that, family reunification was only permitted to a very limited extent via a monthly quota of a maximum of 1,000 visas.
For those affected, this means that regular family reunification is currently impossible. Only in very rare exceptional cases can it be examined whether reunification is possible on humanitarian grounds in cases of hardship. However, the requirements for this are very strict and go far beyond the normal burden of family separation.
