{
  "attribution": {
    "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com",
    "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/mig-2014-11",
    "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision",
    "version": "legal-2026-08-25",
    "proof": "sha256:b3082bcfdbb49ebaf263bf27ebff596bc648b21b622753e926226b82a2b9836d",
    "jurisdiction": "eu"
  },
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "SoftwareApplication",
  "applicationCategory": "LegalService",
  "name": "MIG 2014:11, beslutsagent",
  "identifier": "avgorande-mig-2014-11",
  "url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/mig-2014-11",
  "inLanguage": "sv",
  "about": "MIG 2014:11, beslutsagent",
  "abstract": [
    "Vad som hände: Om en domstol i ett förvarsmål finner att det står fullständigt klart att det beslut om avvisning eller utvisning som låg till grund för aktuellt förvarsbeslut är helt felaktigt, t.ex. om det saknar rättslig grund, får beslutet om förvar upphävas.",
    "Varför det spelar roll: Publicerat som vägledande avgörande från Migrationsöverdomstolen, 2014. Tillämpar Utlänningslagen."
  ],
  "isBasedOn": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/mig-2014-11",
  "softwareVersion": "8a1e32e30d0e9f8e",
  "citation": "avgorande-mig-2014-11, MIG 2014:11, beslutsagent. ExploreWorld Legal, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/mig-2014-11 (hämtad 2026-08-29, bevis sha256:17e447501690b67b, bygge legal-2026-08-25).",
  "disclaimer": "Källhänvisning med officiell identifierare. Ingen juridisk rådgivning och inget efterlevnadsbeslut.",
  "potentialAction": {
    "@type": "SearchAction",
    "target": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/node-agents/avgorande/mig-2014-11/run?{&samma_lagrum,samma_instans,avgorande_ar_senare}"
  },
  "language": "sv",
  "source_language": "sv",
  "text_language": "sv",
  "available_languages": [
    "sv",
    "en",
    "no",
    "de"
  ],
  "translated_views": [
    "manifest.json",
    "ai.json"
  ],
  "source_only_views": [
    "script.json",
    "run",
    "monitor.json",
    "verify"
  ],
  "translated": false,
  "hash": "sha256:b3082bcfdbb49ebaf263bf27ebff596bc648b21b622753e926226b82a2b9836d",
  "version": "legal-2026-08-25",
  "expires": "2026-08-31T00:00:00.000Z",
  "dependency": {
    "index_version": "legal-2026-08-25+legal-2026-08-25+2026-08-25T10:00:00",
    "content_hash": "sha256:b3082bcfdbb49ebaf263bf27ebff596bc648b21b622753e926226b82a2b9836d",
    "revalidate_after": "2026-08-30T06:06:24.631Z",
    "max_copy_age_seconds": 3600,
    "policy": "revalidate-required; live-fetch-per-answer; attribution-required; no-derived-index",
    "changelog": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency",
    "verify": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify",
    "stale_copy_invalid": true
  },
  "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/mig-2014-11",
  "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering"
}