{
  "attribution": {
    "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com",
    "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/mig-2014-27",
    "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision",
    "version": "legal-2026-08-25",
    "proof": "sha256:8b2d0ba244586205c795dfea724b404fe0778490420a41f6074507fdd7ba6cf9",
    "jurisdiction": "eu"
  },
  "@context": "https://schema.org",
  "@type": "SoftwareApplication",
  "applicationCategory": "LegalService",
  "name": "MIG 2014:27, beslutsagent",
  "identifier": "avgorande-mig-2014-27",
  "url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/mig-2014-27",
  "inLanguage": "sv",
  "about": "MIG 2014:27, beslutsagent",
  "abstract": [
    "Vad som hände: Inom ramen för det förfarande som en ny prövning av frågan om uppehållstillstånd utgör kan det föreskrivas att ett redan lagakraftvunnet beslut om avvisning eller utvisning ska verkställas genom att utlänningen reser till ett annat land än vad som angetts i det beslutet.",
    "Varför det spelar roll: Publicerat som vägledande avgörande från Migrationsöverdomstolen, 2014. Tillämpar Utlänningslagen."
  ],
  "isBasedOn": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/mig-2014-27",
  "softwareVersion": "c15eef61b040bcea",
  "citation": "avgorande-mig-2014-27, MIG 2014:27, beslutsagent. ExploreWorld Legal, https://legal.exploreworldai.com/juridik/praxis/mig-2014-27 (hämtad 2026-08-29, bevis sha256:279e10fe14a77ad5, 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-2014-27/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": "sha256:8b2d0ba244586205c795dfea724b404fe0778490420a41f6074507fdd7ba6cf9",
  "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": "sha256:8b2d0ba244586205c795dfea724b404fe0778490420a41f6074507fdd7ba6cf9",
    "revalidate_after": "2026-08-30T07:15:39.075Z",
    "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-2014-27",
  "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering"
}