In numerous articles drawn from our legal practice, we never tire of describing the many life situations faced by "Russian Germans" through real cases. Over the years, we have built up an invaluable body of knowledge and considerable, positive experience in this not entirely straightforward field of law (Bundesvertriebenengesetz – BVFG). By tirelessly following current case law and constantly refining our approach, we take on these cases with genuine enthusiasm, convinced that no problem is truly unsolvable and that a way out exists in any situation, however hopeless it may look at first glance — it simply takes viewing the situation on its own individual terms.
Anastasia (name changed) was in a hurry to file her application for late-resettler status, and even came to our firm for a consultation. After reviewing the young woman's story and analyzing her documents, our lawyer immediately warned her of a high likelihood of refusal. He pointed out that it would be far more sensible to first wait for a decision in the case of Anastasia's mother (let's call her Lyudmila), which was already pending before the Federal Administrative Office for resettler affairs (Bundesverwaltungsamt, BVA), before taking any further steps — since the outcome of that case would play a decisive role in her own. Anastasia, however, wasn't willing to listen, and — as it later turned out — filed her own application for late-resettler recognition on her own. Some time later, exactly as our lawyer had anticipated, Anastasia received a refusal from the authority, which is what brought her to us to take over her case and help her obtain the status she wanted in Germany.
B1/B2 Language Certificate Requirements
To obtain late-resettler status, an applicant must confirm German as their native-level language (§ 6 BVFG) — exemption from the test is possible only on medical grounds.
Where an application is refused, it is also possible to subsequently file an objection to the authority's negative decision. Naturally, our lawyer made immediate use of this option, filing the corresponding objection on the client's behalf and in her interest. The "room for argument," however, was limited given the circumstances: her mother's case was still under review. Within the proceedings opened by the objection, our lawyer therefore submitted a petition asking the authority to suspend our client's case — a way of buying the time needed to await the final decision in Lyudmila's case. The authority, however, completely disregarded our petition and issued a negative decision in absentia, rejecting the objection.
Only one option remained: court. Since Lyudmila's case was under review at the time, it came as no surprise to our lawyer that it was taking such a long time to resolve — there was, unfortunately, no way to influence the pace of that review. Legal avenues nonetheless remained open, and our lawyer filed a petition with the court asking that Anastasia's proceedings be suspended, explaining the full situation to the court — namely, that the outcome of her case depended directly on the decision reached regarding her mother, making the matter essentially one of timing. Our lawyer also noted his view that the decision regarding the mother was likely to be favorable.
By that point, the Federal Administrative Office for resettler affairs, having learned that the case had been referred to court, proposed a settlement on its own initiative: if our lawyer withdrew the lawsuit, the authority indicated that, should Lyudmila be recognized as a late resettler following the review of her case, Anastasia's application would also be granted — provided, of course, that she met the statutory preconditions. The offer sounded appealing, but it remained just that: an offer. Our lawyer therefore replied in writing, stating our willingness to accept the proposed terms only if the authority provided official written confirmation guaranteeing that outcome. The authority did not keep us waiting — within the following weeks, having received that confirmation, we withdrew the lawsuit from court.
The strategy our lawyer chose proved sound and effective. Lyudmila soon received her admission decision, the so-called Aufnahmebescheid, officially confirming her recognition as a late resettler. With the authority's confirmation now in hand, only a few steps remained before a favorable decision would follow for our client as well. On the strength of the settlement and that confirmation, we had Anastasia's case reopened, and she was subsequently able to call herself a late resettler in her own right, with the status officially confirmed.
There may well be an element of luck in this story. But without the legal assistance our lawyer provided, someone without experience handling such cases could never have achieved this result on their own. After a second refusal from the Federal Administrative Office for resettler affairs, our lawyer pressed the matter twice as hard into the "courtroom arena," aiming to demonstrate that the authority's rejection of our objection was unjustified — with the court effectively acting as a mediator that helped bring about the settlement.
Unfortunately, officials handling late-resettler matters very often treat applicants' cases quite superficially and formalistically. They rely on standard phrasing, offer no comprehensible reasoning for refusals, and sometimes issue negative decisions in genuinely disputed, noteworthy situations with little justification at all. The only explanation may be a reluctance to dig into the substance of a case once it deviates even slightly from the standard template — yet no single template can capture every real-life situation. Stories that look superficially similar can, on closer inspection, differ fundamentally and lead to entirely different outcomes.
All rights reserved. Copying or republishing this article requires a link to the original source.
