Key facts
- British citizens residing in Sweden are facing deportation orders.
- Some individuals, including vulnerable elderly citizens, are being targeted for removal.
- Swedish courts have prioritized immigration interests over human rights in some cases.
- Sweden has a significantly higher refusal rate for post-Brexit residency applications compared to other EU states.
- The UK government has expressed concern over Sweden's strict interpretation of the withdrawal agreement's residency requirements.
Thousands of British citizens living in Sweden are facing deportation orders, with some of the most vulnerable individuals being targeted despite long-term residency and health issues. This situation appears to stem from a stricter interpretation of post-Brexit residency requirements by Swedish authorities compared to other EU member states.
One notable case involves 74-year-old Horace Mason, who has lived in Sweden for 25 years and is in full-time care due to vascular dementia and Parkinsonism. Despite his condition and family ties, a Swedish court ruled that his deportation was proportionate, prioritizing immigration interests over his human rights. Similarly, 78-year-old widow Joyce Thomas, a resident for 21 years, has lost her appeal against a migration agency decision to leave the country within four weeks.
Campaigners like David Milstead from British in Sweden express concern that these outcomes were not intended by the EU-UK withdrawal agreement. He notes that some individuals, upon receiving removal orders, leave the country out of embarrassment rather than fighting the decision. The UK government has reportedly raised these concerns with Sweden multiple times, but little appears to have changed.
Statistics from 2024 indicate that Sweden has a significantly higher refusal rate for post-Brexit residency applications, with 27.5% of approximately 14,000 applications being rejected. This rate is three times higher than in any other EU member state and far exceeds the EU average of 3%-4%. Swedish authorities maintain that simply being unaware of the application requirement is not considered sufficient grounds for acceptance.
Similar issues arose in Denmark two years prior, where Britons faced deportation for minor delays in their applications. The Danish government acknowledged communication shortcomings and subsequently amended its laws to provide affected individuals another opportunity to apply for residency. The current situation in Sweden raises questions about whether the UK government adequately communicated the implications of the 'constitutive' system adopted by some EU countries, where an application was necessary to secure residency rights post-Brexit.