Understand your rights and
navigate Finland

Violation of the right to be heard (HL §34). Under Finnish administrative law, before issuing a negative decision Migri must give the applicant the opportunity to be heard. Migri did not request your payslips or invite a response before deciding. This is a direct breach of HL §34.

Reasoning standard (HL §45). The decision's "insufficient employment continuity" reason lacks specifics. KHO 2022:84 held that vague reasoning without facts is itself an independent ground for quashing.

Substantive: UlkL §54. Continuous employment is one of several factors under §54, not the sole criterion. A signed ongoing contract weighs in favour of granting the extension.

Evidence to gather

• Recent payslips covering the employment Migri called discontinuous.
• The signed employment contract, with its start date and term.
• A short letter from your employer confirming the role continues.

Appeal deadline: 30 days from the date the decision was served (UlkL §190).

1. File a valitus to the Administrative Court (hallinto-oikeus) within 30 days under UlkL §190.
2. Lead with the procedural violation — HL §34 — and cite KHO 2022:84 as primary authority.
3. Attach the payslips, contract and employer letter listed above.
4. Request an oral hearing under HPL §57 to present the employment evidence.