Advertising
News
To the list of news

16 Mar 2026
Cyprus appeals court overturns deportation ruling against Nepalese domestic worker

Nicosia, Cyprus. An appeals court has cancelled a decision to declare a woman from Nepal an illegal immigrant and deport her. The ruling was taken on March 10 and published on Monday.


Background and initial proceedings

The ruling effectively annulled a decision by the court of first instance, saying the authorities may have misled the court as to when the woman was considered to be residing in the Republic illegally.

The woman arrived in Cyprus in 2024 as a domestic worker in Larnaca. On May 22, 2024, she was released by her employer and her residence permit was revoked. On January 21, 2025, she applied for a residence permit to work for a new employer.

Immigration service account and arrest

The immigration service in Nicosia said the applicant had been handed a letter on April 9, 2025, announcing her release from her new employer. When she was arrested on May 16, 2025, there was no pending application in the system; when questioned, the woman said she did not wish to return to her country and wanted to find another job.

She was then declared a forbidden immigrant and the process began for her remand and deportation.

Appeals court findings

The administrative court had rejected her application, saying the authorities’ actions were adequately justified.

The appeals court revised the facts and found that the process had been initiated during her 30-day grace period to find a new employer, before she was obliged to leave the country.

It found that the agreement to be released from the employer was signed on April 9, 2025, but the Nepalese woman signed on May 1, 2025. The court said the date of acceptance of the agreement was therefore May 1, 2025, and that the woman still had time to find new employment before being considered an illegal immigrant.

The court also said that, although there was a presumption in favour of the correctness of the court of first instance ruling, this could be overturned when evidence arose that raised serious doubts.


What do you think the ruling means for how grace periods are applied in similar immigration cases?

Показать комментарии
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments