What section 69(1) FPG means when an EEA citizen has fulfilled the departure obligation under section 70.
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.
Under section 69(1) FPG, an expulsion becomes moot once the person concerned has complied with the departure obligation in section 70 FPG. The stay in Austria must actually and effectively have ended.
Section 70 sets out when the obligation becomes enforceable and which timing rules apply. The decision, enforceability, any deferral and the actual stay must be considered together.
This legal consequence concerns the expulsion under section 69(1). Other measures and questions about later entry or residence require their own assessment.
Start with the measure named in the decision. Then check whether the duty under section 70 FPG has been fulfilled.
Already know you want to get in touch? Go straight to the enquiry form.
Read the operative part and the statutory basis stated in the decision.
Once the duty under section 70 FPG has been fulfilled, section 69(1) states that the expulsion becomes moot. Compare the complete decision with the date of enforceability, any deferral of enforcement and the actual end of the stay.
Check whether the decision contains another measure. The rule for an expulsion does not resolve that separate question.
Check when the expulsion becomes enforceable and whether a deferral was granted or revoked. Section 69(1) addresses the effect after the duty under section 70 has been fulfilled.
Set out the decision dates, any deferral of enforcement and the actual travel history. Section 70 requires the stay in Austria to be actually and effectively ended.
An entry ban or another residence measure has its own legal basis. Identify the operative part and legal provision for that measure before drawing a conclusion from departure.
Keep the full decision, including its operative part and reasons. The exact measure determines whether section 69(1) FPG or another rule is relevant.
The provision names EEA citizens, Swiss citizens and beneficiary third-country nationals. It applies to an expulsion of a person in one of those groups after that person has complied with the departure obligation under section 70 FPG.
The statutory effect follows from fulfilment of that obligation. Section 69(1) does not list a separate application or formal lifting decision as an additional condition. The authority may still need to establish whether the facts show that the duty was fulfilled.
Under section 70(1), an expulsion becomes enforceable no later than when it becomes final. The person must then depart without delay and actually and effectively end their stay in Austria.
Section 70 contains further timing rules. Enforceability is postponed for the duration of a qualifying deprivation of liberty imposed for a punishable act. Under section 70(3), the authority must grant a one-month deferral of enforcement ex officio when it issues an expulsion, unless immediate departure is required in the interests of public order or security. Section 70(4) sets out grounds for revoking the deferral.
The deferral concerns enforcement of the measure. It is a different rule from a voluntary-departure period in another procedure. The exact order and whether the duty was fulfilled remain decisive.
Section 69(1) concerns an expulsion. Section 69(2) deals with lifting a residence ban, on request or ex officio, when the reasons for it have ceased. Section 69(3) provides a separate consequence for a residence ban when refugee status is granted. Those conditions differ from fulfilment of the departure obligation in section 69(1). The separate rule on refugee status under section 69(3) is explained in its own article.
An entry ban under section 53 FPG is a different measure. Section 69(1) does not determine a separate ban or every question about later entry or residence.
The provision states the effect on the expulsion. It does not say that separate authority records or independent measures automatically disappear.
Set out the complete decision, proof of service, the date it became enforceable and any notice granting or revoking a deferral. Add a chronology of the actual departure and the end of the stay in Austria.
Sections 69 and 70 do not prescribe a closed list of evidence. Travel records, official confirmations and records about the person’s subsequent stay may help, depending on the facts. Their significance has to be assessed alongside the decision and the actual course of events.
If the legal basis or timing remains unclear, a review of the BFA procedure and the available decisions may help. Information on legal advice in BFA proceedings explains which records matter for a legal review.
Legal updates: For current developments, see Brandauer Legal Updates.
In immigration law, deadlines and the right argumentation decide. Call us directly or send an email, callback within one business day.
Address
BRANDAUER Rechtsanwälte GmbH Giselakai 51 5020 Salzburg
Phone
+43 662 6280000