If an employer illegally employs a foreigner, they must cover the costs of the deportation.

Administrative Court of Koblenz, February 27, 2024, Case No.: 1 K 859/23.KO

Facts of the Case:

Construction company owner employs Albanian worker illegally in Germany.

On March 15, 2023, officials from the Hanover Main Customs Office searched a construction site in the defendant’s district. They encountered an Albanian national working there. The worker did not possess a residence permit and stated that he was employed by the plaintiff, who runs a construction business. According to the visa stamps in his passport, he had last entered the Schengen area through Hungary on September 8, 2022. By order dated March 16, 2023, the defendant expelled the worker from the Federal Republic of Germany and instructed him to leave the country by March 28, 2023.

City issues deportation order and arrest warrant

When the worker did not leave voluntarily, the defendant issued a search warrant for him. According to a discharge report dated April 12, 2023, the worker was hospitalized from April 1, 2023, to April 12, 2023, due to a perforated stomach. On April 13, 2023, police found the worker at Terminal 1 of the airport, took him into custody, and secured €520.01 in cash. At the defendant’s request, the district court ordered that the worker be detained until April 19, 2023, to secure his deportation. The court reasoned, among other things, that the worker was subject to deportation due to his illegal entry.

Worker was eventually arrested, detained, and then deported

Finally, the worker was deported from Frankfurt Airport to Tirana. The plaintiff was billed EUR 5,849.01 for the deportation costs.

The employer filed a lawsuit against the billing of the deportation costs (against the cost assessment notice).

Decision of the Administrative Court of Koblenz

Under Section 66 of the Residence Act, employers who illegally employ a foreigner must bear the costs of deportation.

Contrary to the employer’s argument, the Administrative Court of Koblenz found the cost assessment notice to be valid. Under Section 66(4) Sentence 1 No. 1, Sentence 2 of the Residence Act (AufenthG), an employer who has employed a deported foreigner despite the fact that the foreigner was not permitted to work must bear the costs associated with the deportation. The scope of the reimbursable costs is determined by Section 67(1) AufenthG. According to this, the costs of deportation include both transportation and other travel costs for the foreigner within and outside Germany (§ 67(1) No. 1 AufenthG), the administrative costs incurred in preparing and carrying out the deportation, including the costs of detention, accommodation, food, and other care for the foreigner (§ 67(1) No. 2 AufenthG), as well as all costs arising from any necessary escort of the foreigner, including personnel costs (§ 67(1) No. 3 AufenthG).

There were no indications of a legitimacy check by the employer

The plaintiff’s obligation to bear costs, which arose in this way, was not waived under Section 66(4a) AufenthG. There were no indications that the plaintiff had sufficiently checked whether he was permitted to employ the worker and had properly registered him with social security.

The deportation measures were also not unlawful

The fact that the worker had been medically treated and was at the airport at the time of arrest did not change the obligation to bear the costs. Although deportation costs, if triggered by official actions and measures that infringe upon the rights of the foreigner, are only reimbursable if the actions and measures were lawful, the worker could still be arrested even at the airport because he could have changed his mind at any time, and the deadline for departure had already passed. The time spent in the hospital also did not negate the assessment of deportation costs, as the worker could have informed the immigration authority at any time and requested an extension of the deadline due to illness.

Important Note: The content of this article has been prepared to the best of our knowledge and belief. However, due to the complexity and constant evolution of the subject matter, we must exclude liability and warranty. Important Notice: The content of this article has been created to the best of our knowledge and understanding. However, due to the complexity and constant changes in the subject matter, we must exclude any liability and warranty.

If you need legal advice, please feel free to call us at 0221 - 80187670 or send us an email at or send an email to info@mth-partner.de info@mth-partner.de

Lawyers in Cologne advise and represent clients nationwide in immigration law.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *