Latest rulings on special protection and social assistance for foreigners (March - April 2022)




Court of Rome, order of 11 April 2022


In this case a Bangladeshi citizen fled in order to face the debts of his family. In fact, the applicant left the country in 2012 and started a seven-year journey, crossing, among other things, the Balkan route, in order to reach Italy in 2019.

The Court "considered the level of integration achieved and the long period of distance from the country of origin; after having worked for a long time as a street vendor, he was hired as a dishwasher in a catering business, and constantly sends money to family members (see the UNILAV form and the numerous receipts of money remittances to the country); in light of the work integration achieved and the condition of autonomy reached" the judge granted the applicant the special protection under art. In the light of the work integration achieved and the condition of autonomy reached", the judge granted the applicant special protection under art. 32, paragraph 3 of Legislative Decree no. 25/08 "as amended by Legislative Decree no. 130/2020 according to the paradigm of the new Article 19 of Legislative Decree no. 286/98.


Court of Rovereto, ordinance of 19 April 2022


In this case, the citizen's application for a provincial childbirth allowance and a single provincial allowance was rejected because he did not have the requisite of ten years of residence in Italy and the EU long-term residence permit. The Labour Judge considered the behaviour of the Autonomous Province of Trento discriminatory with regard to the childbirth allowance, referring to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) of 2 September 2021 ("childbirth allowance and maternity allowance fall within the areas of social security for which third-country nationals referred to in Article 3(1)(b) and (c) of Directive 2011/98 benefit from the right to equal treatment laid down by that Directive. Considering that Italy did not make use of the option offered by the directive to Member States to restrict equal treatment, the Court considers that the national legislation excluding such third-country nationals from the benefit of such allowances is not in compliance with Article 12(1)(e) of that directive") and with the aforementioned judgment of the Constitutional Court (judgment no. 54 published on 4 March 2022 - Bonus bebè and maternity allowance also to foreigners: unreasonable to deny adequate protection to those who need it most).


Florence Court of Appeal, judgment no. 182 of 3 March 2022


The Court of Appeal of Florence - labour section - recognises the social allowance to a parent of an Italian citizen, holder of a residence card pursuant to art. 17 of legislative decree 30/07 because of the clause in art. 23 of the same decree (Implementation of directive 2004/38/EC on the right of EU citizens and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States).

Moreover, the judge examined the issue by considering the provision of art. 19 par. 3 of legislative decree no. 30 of 2007, which excludes EU citizens and their family members from social assistance benefits only during the first three months of their stay, to be sufficiently clear.


Court of Rome, decree of 23 March 2022


The Court of Rome, recognised the special protection provided for by art. 32 of the Legislative Decree no. 25/2008 to a citizen of the Ivory Coast, resident in Italy since 2017 and perfectly integrated in Italy.

In the decree issued by the Court, the autonomy of the "special protection" with respect to international protection is highlighted, also following a precise reconstruction of the institution, in its evolution in the legal system.

In particular, with regard to the applicant's individual conditions, it is stated: "(...) in the case we are dealing with, the applicant arrived in Italy in August 2017 and appears to have rapidly integrated in the territory both on a social and working level. It emerges, indeed, from the documentation filed in the case-file that the applicant has acquired a good level of knowledge of the Italian language, has been working since 2020 and continues to do so with a certain regularity, albeit with fixed-term contracts that are gradually renewed, and sends money to his family in the Ivory Coast. In view of the length of time that has elapsed since her entry into Italy and the fact that she has been integrated into the country, it is therefore considered that any repatriation would constitute a violation of her right to the protection of her private life".

Therefore, according to the Court of Rome "coming to the examination of the case in question, the Court believes, absorbing any other profile, that on the basis of what has been documented in the records, the applicant can be granted a special protection functional to the protection of privacy and falling under the case of paragraph 1.1 of art. 19 of the legislative decree no. 286 of 25 July 1998",of 25 July 1998", also taking into consideration the absence of reasons of public security preventing the issue of a residence permit.


Prof. Avv. Paolo Iafrate


The content of this article does not constitute legal advice, but has an informative function. For tailor made legal advice, contact the firm by e-mail to: info@dongpartners.eu or by phone +39 06 916505710. © Dong & Partners International Law Firm, All rights reserved.


#dongpartners #immigrazione #italia

3 views0 comments