Facts and challenged measures
The order combined an OQTF without voluntary departure, designation of the country of removal and a thirty-six-month return ban. The applicant produced a receipt concerning renewal of a Portuguese residence permit.
The document was dated 25 April 2026, valid for sixty days and renewable according to the judgment. The applicant was assisted by Maître Nolwenn Le Sayec, appointed under the duty scheme.
The decisive point
The prefecture had based removal on unlawful stay. In light of the Portuguese receipt that remained valid, the court found that the basis used for the OQTF was erroneous in this case.
That factual point determined the review of the OQTF. The judgment does not establish that every foreign document always defeats removal; its nature, validity and the rights it records must be checked.
Consequences for connected measures
The court cancelled the OQTF and, in the circumstances of the case, the destination decision and thirty-six-month IRTF as consequential measures. It directed the administration to delete the corresponding SIS alert.
The SIS direction shows the practical effect of the judgment beyond written cancellation. Evidence of implementation remains useful to confirm that the database was updated.
Limited scope of the judgment
The outcome rests on the Portuguese document and its validity at the relevant dates. A person without a comparable document, or whose document confers different rights, is not automatically in the same position.
The decision illustrates why any permit or renewal receipt issued by another European state should be produced immediately. It does not guarantee cancellation of another OQTF.
Discuss your situation
You can send the firm the essential facts, relevant dates and any known deadline.
Frequently asked questions
Which measures were cancelled?
The OQTF without voluntary departure, the country-of-removal decision and the thirty-six-month IRTF. The court also ordered deletion of the corresponding SIS alert.
Why did the Portuguese receipt matter?
The court found that, at the date of the order, it evidenced a live renewal process with a stated period of validity, undermining the unlawful-stay basis relied on by the prefecture.
Will the same type of document always lead to cancellation?
No. Its nature, validity, legal effect and the precise reasons in the order must be assessed in each case.