{
  "attribution": {
    "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com",
    "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/mig-2014-19",
    "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision",
    "version": "legal-2026-08-25",
    "proof": "sha256:1cceb429196e1b11cffdc84dba266c2b362f1716d4ece41fe6f9db6ca9debdb5",
    "jurisdiction": "eu"
  },
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "SoftwareApplication",
  "applicationCategory": "LegalService",
  "name": "MIG 2014:19, beslutsagent",
  "identifier": "avgorande-mig-2014-19",
  "url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/mig-2014-19",
  "inLanguage": "sv",
  "about": "MIG 2014:19, beslutsagent",
  "abstract": [
    "Vad domstolen sa: Ett tillförlitligt sponsoråtagande, som omfattar både resekostnader och uppehälle, kan räcka för att en person som ansöker om en enhetlig Schengenvisering ska anses ha visat att han eller hon har tillräckliga medel för sitt uppehälle, både under den planerade vistelsen och för resan tillbaka hem.",
    "Varför det spelar roll: Publicerat som vägledande avgörande från Migrationsöverdomstolen, 2014. Tillämpar Utlänningslagen."
  ],
  "isBasedOn": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/mig-2014-19",
  "softwareVersion": "699ac86f17c594db",
  "citation": "avgorande-mig-2014-19, MIG 2014:19, beslutsagent. ExploreWorld Legal, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/mig-2014-19 (hämtad 2026-08-29, bevis sha256:d02fbfff9627e6f4, 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-2014-19/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": "sha256:1cceb429196e1b11cffdc84dba266c2b362f1716d4ece41fe6f9db6ca9debdb5",
  "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": "sha256:1cceb429196e1b11cffdc84dba266c2b362f1716d4ece41fe6f9db6ca9debdb5",
    "revalidate_after": "2026-08-30T08:13:48.422Z",
    "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-2014-19",
  "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering"
}