IU cases: Berlin Administrative Court issues new ruling on the attendance requirement for foreign students

Germany is engaged in heated debate about modernizing its administration and almost mantra-like invokes the skilled worker shortage. But while the federal government celebrates the Skilled Immigration Act as a major achievement, a dynamic is unfolding behind the scenes at Berlin's authorities that is deterring highly qualified talent rather than welcoming it. This concerns young people from all over the world, particularly from India , who have invested considerable money and hope in studying at the IU International University . For a long time, paralyzing uncertainty prevailed: Would the Berlin State Office for Immigration (LEA) accept these hybrid study models under Section 16b of the Residence Act, or would the students' livelihoods be jeopardized? After a period of intense confrontation and a setback in the first instance in November 2025, there has now been an unexpected turn of events by the 24th Chamber of the Berlin Administrative Court , which offers profound insights not only from a legal perspective but also from a moral one.

The rigid gaze of the authorities against the reality of modern education

Just a few months ago, the situation seemed hopeless. The Berlin State Office for Immigration (LEA) appeared in court with an unprecedented number of case workers, taking almost ideological action against the IU students . The agency's argument was as simple as it was regressive: anyone not physically present in a lecture hall is not studying "properly." This view completely ignores the fact that the digitalization of education is not a passing trend, but a global reality. Hybrid models offer the flexibility that modern life demands, especially for highly motivated international students . Nevertheless, the LEA maintained its position that degree programs without strict, enforced attendance requirements do not meet the requirements of Section 16b of the German Residence Act (AufenthG ).

We have been critically observing this practice from the very beginning. It's paradoxical: Germany advertises worldwide for the "best minds," yet as soon as these individuals arrive and utilize state-of-the-art educational formats, they are threatened with the revocation of their residency permits . This administrative practice of the LEA Berlin undermines political efforts to create an attractive immigration society and demonstrates a deep distrust of private educational institutions and their foreign clients.

The legal about-face: A "slap in the face" for the LEA

The recent decision of the Berlin Administrative Court of March 20, 2026 (Case No. 24 L 1/26) marks a turning point, which we as a law firm expressly welcome. In preliminary injunction proceedings, the 24th Chamber ordered the suspension of the deportation order against a rejection notice issued by the State Office for Immigration (LEA). In plain terms, this means that the affected students may remain for the time being, and the authority's reasoning was deemed likely to be unlawful. It is particularly noteworthy that the court explicitly adopts the legal opinion that calls for a modern interpretation of the Residence Act, thereby contradicting the ruling of the neighboring 11th Chamber of the Berlin Administrative Court from November. It is not very common for two chambers of the same court to hold differing legal opinions in similar cases.

The court has thus delivered a clear lesson to the State Office for Immigration and Asylum (LEA). Studying within the meaning of Section 16b of the German Residence Act (AufenthG) does not require the anachronistic obligation to attend every single lecture , as long as the studies are pursued seriously and the university monitors progress. The LEA's attempt to apply stricter standards than the law itself has now been stopped by the court. For the Indian students, who were often scapegoated for a flawed control policy, this is a liberating victory. It demonstrates that the rule of law functions when authorities abuse their discretionary powers to make politically motivated examples of a vulnerable group.

Protection of legitimate expectations and the REST policy: Why the LEA is wrong

A key criticism from our firm regarding the previous practice was the complete disregard for the principle of legitimate expectations. Many students initially received visas and acceptance letters, only to be confronted with a radical change in administrative practice midway through their studies . The LEA (State Office for Immigration and Asylum) operated according to the motto: "What was valid yesterday is irrelevant today." However, residency law is not a legal vacuum for bureaucratic arbitrariness. Furthermore, the European REST Directive , which aims to promote student mobility within the EU, plays a crucial role. If national hurdles for modern forms of study are raised too high, this violates the spirit of EU law , which strives for the harmonization and simplification of access to education.

The Berlin Administrative Court 's decision proves that a rigid focus on physical presence is legally untenable in the age of digital transformation. We see this as confirmation for all highly qualified immigrants who refuse to be deterred by bureaucratic intimidation. It is a victory for common sense and for Germany's attractiveness as a place to study.

Conclusion: A necessary signal for Germany as a place of education

The current ruling is far more than a partial victory in a niche legal dispute. It sends a cautionary message to all immigration authorities that the digitalization of education must not be hampered by immigration-related bureaucratic hurdles. We note that the Berlin Immigration Office (LEA Berlin) has failed miserably in its attempt to discredit all IU students . Looking ahead, we can only hope that the authorities will take this decision as an opportunity to return to a more objective approach and engage in dialogue with educational institutions and the students' legal representatives, instead of getting bogged down in lengthy and costly legal proceedings.

The IU proceedings remain intriguing. It remains to be seen which legal interpretation of the different chambers at the Administrative Court will ultimately prevail in the higher court. We will keep you updated!

How we as a law firm can actively work for you and VisaGuard

As a specialized law firm for immigration law, we are at the forefront of the fight against erroneous decisions by authorities. We support you in asserting your rights against agencies such as the LEA Berlin – whether through well-founded appeals or legal representation before the administrative courts. If your residence permit is at risk due to study-related circumstances, we analyze your situation individually, examine the protection of legitimate expectations, and utilize current case law from the Berlin Administrative Court to secure your continued stay in Germany. Trust in our expertise so that your studies and professional future don't fail due to bureaucratic hurdles.

→ Book an appointment now and receive a response within 48 hours

Here is the link to the new ruling by the Berlin Administrative Court: https://gesetze.berlin.de/bsbe/document/NJRE001637506