Court rejects Albanian man’s damages claim over airport stay

A Reykjavík District Court has rejected an Albanian citizen’s claim for compensation after he was ordered to leave Iceland and spent nearly 24 hours in a restricted area of the terminal at Keflavík Airport. The court found the police decision was not lawful but said their conduct had not been shown to be culpable, mbl.is reported.

The judgment was issued on November 2. The court also found that the man had not been unlawfully deprived of his liberty. Each side must cover its own legal costs.

The man arrived from Italy on the morning of December 12, 2023. Police questioned him at the airport, saying he had not clearly explained the purpose of his stay in Iceland.

According to a police report, the man said through an interpreter that he intended to see Iceland’s natural scenery. He said he had booked accommodation and had a return ticket for four days later. Police considered his explanation insufficiently clear about what he planned to do and where he intended to go. They also took into account that a fellow traveller had a criminal record in Iceland.

Police ordered the man to remain in a designated part of the terminal and obtain a ticket out of the country. His lawyer requested that the case be reopened later that day. Police granted the request and withdrew the decision the following morning, allowing the man to enter Iceland.

The man argued that he had been unlawfully deprived of his liberty and sought compensation under criminal procedure and constitutional provisions, as well as compensation law. The court found that the evidence did not show he had been arrested. It said he could return to his home country and rejected the argument that the restrictions amounted to a travel ban, noting that police had instructed him to obtain a ticket out of Iceland.

The court said the police action was not connected to a criminal investigation and the man had not been treated as a suspect. It therefore found that the compensation provisions in criminal procedure law did not apply.

The court noted that no new evidence or explanation appeared to have emerged before police reversed the decision. It concluded that the initial refusal had resulted from an inadequate assessment of the man’s answers and was not in accordance with the law. However, the man had not established that the police acted culpably, a necessary condition for compensation.