You moved to France after Brexit, found the house, registered with the tax office and started to build a life here. But your spouse is still in Manchester or Kent with the children, or your partner can only visit in short stays that never quite add up to a family life. Every month apart costs money, every border crossing adds stress, and the school calendar keeps moving. French law offers a dedicated answer to exactly this situation: family reunification (regroupement familial), the procedure by which a foreign national lawfully settled in France brings a husband or wife and minor children to live with them. Since 1 January 2021 British citizens have been third-country nationals like any others, so this procedure, once irrelevant to Britons, is now the main legal road for reuniting a British family on French soil. It is a demanding road. You must show eighteen months of lawful residence, stable income at least equal to the national minimum wage (salaire minimum de croissance, SMIC), a flat or house big enough for the whole family, and respect for the basic principles of family life in France. The file passes through the French Office for Immigration and Integration (Office fran\u00e7ais de l’immigration et de l’int\u00e9gration, OFII), the mayor (maire) of your commune and the prefect (pr\u00e9fet) of your department, and any weak link can sink it. This guide explains who can apply and who can join, the three conditions in detail, the examination step by step and, because refusals are frequent, how to challenge a refusal before the administrative court (tribunal administratif) and what to do when an order to leave France (obligation de quitter le territoire fran\u00e7ais) lands on a family member who is already here.<\/p>\n
The starting point is time. The statute provides, word for word: “L’\u00e9tranger qui s\u00e9journe r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement en France depuis au moins dix-huit mois, sous couvert d’un des titres d’une dur\u00e9e de validit\u00e9 d’au moins un an pr\u00e9vus par le pr\u00e9sent code ou par des conventions internationales, peut demander \u00e0 b\u00e9n\u00e9ficier de son droit \u00e0 \u00eatre rejoint, au titre du regroupement familial : 1\u00b0 Par son conjoint, si ce dernier est \u00e2g\u00e9 d’au moins dix-huit ans ; 2\u00b0 Et par les enfants du couple mineurs de dix-huit ans.” In plain English, a foreign national who has lived lawfully in France for at least eighteen months, holding a residence document valid for at least one year, may ask to be joined through family reunification by a husband or wife aged at least eighteen and by the couple’s children under eighteen. This is Article L.434-2 of the Code on the Entry and Residence of Foreign Nationals and the Right of Asylum (Code de l’entr\u00e9e et du s\u00e9jour des \u00e9trangers et du droit d’asile, CESEDA)<\/a>, and it is the gateway to everything that follows. A British sponsor who arrived in 2023 on a long-stay visa, then obtained a one-year temporary card (carte de s\u00e9jour temporaire) and renewed it, will normally satisfy the eighteen-month test once the renewals show eighteen months of continuous lawful stay. Short-stay Schengen stamps, visa-exempt visits under the 90 days in any 180-day rule and gaps without a valid permit do not count.<\/p>\n The quality of the sponsor’s own papers matters just as much as their age. The regulation lists exactly which documents open the procedure: “L’\u00e9tranger qui formule une demande de regroupement familial doit justifier de la possession d’un des documents de s\u00e9jour suivants : 1\u00b0 Une carte de s\u00e9jour temporaire, d’une dur\u00e9e de validit\u00e9 d’au moins un an ; 2\u00b0 Une carte de s\u00e9jour pluriannuelle ; 3\u00b0 Une carte de r\u00e9sident, d’une dur\u00e9e de dix ans ou \u00e0 dur\u00e9e ind\u00e9termin\u00e9e ; 4\u00b0 Le r\u00e9c\u00e9piss\u00e9 de demande de renouvellement du titre de s\u00e9jour mentionn\u00e9 aux 1\u00b0, 2\u00b0 ou 3\u00b0.” That is Article R.434-1 CESEDA<\/a>: a temporary card valid for at least one year, a multi-year card (carte de s\u00e9jour pluriannuelle), a ten-year resident card (carte de r\u00e9sident), or the receipt (r\u00e9c\u00e9piss\u00e9) for renewal of one of those cards. A British holder of a multi-year card, whatever the ground printed on it, files under the second item. A sponsor whose card has expired but who holds a renewal receipt files under the fourth. A sponsor with nothing but an expired visa and no receipt cannot start the procedure and should regularise their own position first, because everything built on an irregular stay collapses at the first check.<\/p>\n On the joining side, the circle of beneficiaries is deliberately narrow, and British families must understand its edges before spending a year on a file. The spouse (conjoint) must be legally married to the sponsor. The official English-language guidance of the French administration states the condition plainly: the procedure concerns your spouse, at least eighteen years old, and legally married to you (see service-public.fr, Family Reunification<\/a>). A British civil partnership, a PACS (pacte civil de solidarit\u00e9, the French registered partnership) or a long cohabitation, however genuine, does not open regroupement familial as such. Couples who never married need a different route, typically a long-stay visitor visa for the partner followed, once in France, by an application examined on other grounds, and they should take advice before choosing that path because it carries its own income and health-insurance conditions.<\/p>\n Children are covered more generously, and blended families, which are common, should read the two relevant articles with care. First, reunification may also be requested for the sponsor’s own minor children and for the spouse’s minor children where parentage (filiation) is established only towards the applicant or the spouse, or where the other parent has died or been deprived of parental rights: “Le regroupement familial peut \u00e9galement \u00eatre demand\u00e9 pour les enfants mineurs de dix-huit ans du demandeur et pour ceux de son conjoint si, au jour de la demande : 1\u00b0 La filiation n’est \u00e9tablie qu’\u00e0 l’\u00e9gard du demandeur ou de son conjoint ; 2\u00b0 Ou lorsque l’autre parent est d\u00e9c\u00e9d\u00e9 ou d\u00e9chu de ses droits parentaux.” That is Article L.434-3 CESEDA<\/a>. Second, where the child has two living parents who both hold parental authority, the file must contain the foreign court decision entrusting the child to the applicant or the spouse plus the other parent’s written permission for the child to come to France: “Le regroupement familial peut \u00eatre demand\u00e9 pour les enfants mineurs de dix-huit ans du demandeur et ceux de son conjoint, qui sont confi\u00e9s, selon le cas, \u00e0 l’un ou l’autre, au titre de l’exercice de l’autorit\u00e9 parentale, en vertu d’une d\u00e9cision d’une juridiction \u00e9trang\u00e8re. Une copie de cette d\u00e9cision devra \u00eatre produite ainsi que l’autorisation de l’autre parent de laisser le mineur venir en France.” That is Article L.434-4 CESEDA<\/a>. A British father in Lyon whose teenage daughter lives in Leeds with her mother therefore needs either sole parental responsibility documented, or the mother’s formal consent alongside the custody order. An English court order works, but it should be translated by a sworn translator (traducteur asserment\u00e9) and, where the prefecture queries it, supported by evidence that the order is final.<\/p>\n One last structural rule shapes family strategy. Reunification is requested for everyone at once: “Le regroupement familial est sollicit\u00e9 pour l’ensemble des personnes d\u00e9sign\u00e9es aux articles L. 434-2 \u00e0 L. 434-4. Un regroupement partiel peut toutefois \u00eatre autoris\u00e9 pour des motifs tenant \u00e0 l’int\u00e9r\u00eat des enfants.” That is Article L.434-1 CESEDA<\/a>. Bringing the spouse this year and a child next year is possible only by exception, justified by the child’s interests, for example a child finishing GCSEs in England. Families should therefore plan the whole move in a single application wherever possible, because a second file means a second examination of income and housing against a larger household.<\/p>\n Once eligibility is established, the sponsor must satisfy three cumulative conditions set by Article L.434-7 CESEDA<\/a>, whose exact wording every applicant should know: “L’\u00e9tranger qui en fait la demande est autoris\u00e9 \u00e0 \u00eatre rejoint au titre du regroupement familial s’il remplit les conditions suivantes : 1\u00b0 Il justifie de ressources stables et suffisantes pour subvenir aux besoins de sa famille ; 2\u00b0 Il dispose ou disposera \u00e0 la date d’arriv\u00e9e de sa famille en France d’un logement consid\u00e9r\u00e9 comme normal pour une famille comparable vivant dans la m\u00eame r\u00e9gion g\u00e9ographique ; 3\u00b0 Il se conforme aux principes essentiels qui, conform\u00e9ment aux lois de la R\u00e9publique, r\u00e9gissent la vie familiale en France, pays d’accueil.” In English: the applicant must show stable and sufficient resources to support the family, must hold or be able to hold, when the family arrives, housing regarded as normal for a comparable family living in the same area, and must comply with the essential principles that, under the laws of the Republic, govern family life in France, the host country. Fail one of the three and the prefect (pr\u00e9fet) may lawfully refuse. Meet all three with paperwork that proves it, and a refusal becomes very hard to defend before a judge.<\/p>\n Resources come first because they cause the most refusals. The regulation measures them against the minimum wage: “Pour l’application du 1\u00b0 de l’article L. 434-7, les ressources du demandeur et de son conjoint qui alimenteront de fa\u00e7on stable le budget de la famille sont appr\u00e9ci\u00e9es sur une p\u00e9riode de douze mois par r\u00e9f\u00e9rence \u00e0 la moyenne mensuelle du salaire minimum de croissance au cours de cette p\u00e9riode. Ces ressources sont consid\u00e9r\u00e9es comme suffisantes lorsqu’elles atteignent un montant \u00e9quivalent \u00e0 : 1\u00b0 Cette moyenne pour une famille de deux ou trois personnes ; 2\u00b0 Cette moyenne major\u00e9e d’un dixi\u00e8me pour une famille de quatre ou cinq personnes ; 3\u00b0 Cette moyenne major\u00e9e d’un cinqui\u00e8me pour une famille de six personnes ou plus.” That is Article R.434-4 CESEDA<\/a>. In practice the administration looks at the last twelve months of the household budget, fed in a stable way by the sponsor and their spouse, and compares the monthly average with the SMIC: one full SMIC for a family of two or three people, the SMIC plus one tenth for four or five people, the SMIC plus one fifth for six or more. Wages from stable employment count best. British sponsors paid from London while working remotely in France should be careful: the income counts only if it genuinely and stably feeds the French household, with French tax returns, payslips and bank statements to prove it, and any exchange-rate wobble between sterling and the euro should be cushioned by a margin above the threshold rather than scraped past to the euro. Family benefits (prestations familiales), the active solidarity income and similar allowances are disregarded, while income from the spouse already in France can be added. A sponsor between contracts, living on savings alone or relying on a promise of future work will normally be refused on this ground, and should wait until twelve solid months of statements tell the right story.<\/p>\n Housing comes second and it is the ground British applicants underestimate most, because English letting standards and French administrative surfaces are different things. The regulation provides: “Pour l’application du 2\u00b0 de l’article L. 434-7, est consid\u00e9r\u00e9 comme normal un logement qui : 1\u00b0 Pr\u00e9sente une superficie habitable totale au moins \u00e9gale \u00e0 : a) en zones A bis et A : 22 m\u00b2 pour un m\u00e9nage sans enfant ou deux personnes, augment\u00e9e de 10 m\u00b2 par personne jusqu’\u00e0 huit personnes et de 5 m\u00b2 par personne suppl\u00e9mentaire au-del\u00e0 de huit personnes ; b) en zones B1 et B2 : 24 m\u00b2 pour un m\u00e9nage sans enfant ou deux personnes, augment\u00e9e de 10 m\u00b2 par personne jusqu’\u00e0 huit personnes et de 5 m\u00b2 par personne suppl\u00e9mentaire au-del\u00e0 de huit personnes ; c) en zone C : 28 m\u00b2 pour un m\u00e9nage sans enfant ou deux personnes, augment\u00e9e de 10 m\u00b2 par personne jusqu’\u00e0 huit personnes et de 5 m\u00b2 par personne suppl\u00e9mentaire au-del\u00e0 de huit personnes ; 2\u00b0 Satisfait aux conditions de salubrit\u00e9 et d’\u00e9quipement fix\u00e9es aux articles 2 et 3 du d\u00e9cret n\u00b0 2002-120 du 30 janvier 2002 relatif aux caract\u00e9ristiques du logement d\u00e9cent”. That is Article R.434-5 CESEDA<\/a>, and the zones are the familiar housing-market divisions: Paris and the inner suburbs sit in zones A bis and A, most large cities in B1 and B2, the rest of the country in zone C. A couple with two children joining them in Paris therefore needs at least 42 square metres of living space (22 for the household plus 10 per additional person), while the same family in rural Dordogne needs 48. Surface alone is not enough: the flat must also satisfy the decency standards on health, safety and equipment set by the 2002 Decree on decent housing (logement d\u00e9cent). Damp studios, rooms without proper heating or kitchens, and overcrowded house-shares fail even when the square metres look right on paper.<\/p>\n The third condition, respect for the essential principles of family life in France, is examined through the file and, where needed, through interviews and checks. The administration’s guidance lists what it covers: monogamy, equality between men and women, physical integrity of the wife and children, school attendance for the children, freedom of marriage, respect for ethnic and religious differences and acceptance that France is a secular Republic. For most British families this condition is a formality, but it should still be taken seriously: children’s future enrolment in a French school (\u00e9cole, coll\u00e8ge, lyc\u00e9e) should be anticipated, and any polygamous situation ends the application immediately, the statute excluding a second spouse expressly.<\/p>\n The examination machine itself has four stations, and knowing who does what lets you chase the file instead of waiting blindly. The application is lodged with the OFII: “L’\u00e9tranger fait sa demande aupr\u00e8s des services de l’Office fran\u00e7ais de l’immigration et de l’int\u00e9gration. Le pr\u00e9fet territorialement comp\u00e9tent ou, \u00e0 Paris, le pr\u00e9fet de police en est imm\u00e9diatement inform\u00e9.” That is Article R.434-7 CESEDA<\/a>. The file uses the official form Cerfa 11437 with civil-status documents (full marriage certificate, birth certificates), twelve months of proof of resources and the housing documents (title deed, lease, or promise of sale stating availability date, surface and characteristics). The OFII forwards the file to the mayor of the commune where the sponsor lives or intends to settle. The mayor checks resources and housing, and specially authorised officers may visit the flat to verify comfort and habitability; the mayor must give a reasoned opinion within two months, and silence counts as a favourable opinion. The OFII completes the investigation where needed and sends everything to the prefect, who must notify the decision within six months of the complete file reaching the OFII. If the prefect has not replied within six months, the application is deemed refused, an implicit refusal (d\u00e9cision implicite de rejet) that can itself be challenged. An express refusal must be reasoned and is sent to the OFII, which forwards it to the mayor and to the French consulate covering the family’s home in Britain (see service-public.fr, Family Reunification<\/a>).<\/p>\n When the answer is yes, the family phase begins and its timetable is strict. The sponsor sends the filing certificate and the civil-status documents to the family in Britain, and the spouse applies without delay to the French consulate for a long-stay visa. The family must enter France within three months of the visas being issued, travel costs being theirs. This visa requirement reflects a general rule worth quoting: “Sous r\u00e9serve des engagements internationaux de la France et des exceptions pr\u00e9vues aux articles L. 412-2 et L. 412-3, la premi\u00e8re d\u00e9livrance d’une carte de s\u00e9jour temporaire ou d’une carte de s\u00e9jour pluriannuelle est subordonn\u00e9e \u00e0 la production par l’\u00e9tranger du visa de long s\u00e9jour mentionn\u00e9 aux 1\u00b0 ou 2\u00b0 de l’article L. 411-1.” That is Article L.412-1 CESEDA<\/a>: first issue of a residence card normally requires a long-stay visa, which is why relatives should never simply fly in visa-exempt and hope to sort out papers later. On arrival the spouse validates the long-stay visa acting as residence permit (visa de long s\u00e9jour valant titre de s\u00e9jour, VLS-TS) online within three months and pays the validation fee; the validated visa covers the first year without a prefecture appointment. The family then undergoes the OFII medical examination, whose certificate is essential for obtaining the residence permit. Minor children enter on a family-reunification visa and need no permit until majority, or sixteen if they want to work. After one year, the spouse applies for a one-year card marked private and family life (vie priv\u00e9e et familiale) with the same validity as the sponsor’s own card.<\/p>\n A refusal is not the end of the story, but the clock starts immediately, so the first task is to read the decision properly. An express refusal must state its reasons: which condition failed and on what evidence. An applicant refused for resources learns whether the prefect counted only six months of payslips, excluded the spouse’s wages or treated self-employed drawings as unstable. An applicant refused for housing learns whether the surface, the decency or simply the missing mayoral inspection sank the file. Silence for six months after the complete file reached the OFII equals an implicit refusal, and the remedy is the same. Three avenues exist and they can be combined: a gracious appeal to the prefect who decided (recours gracieux), a hierarchical appeal to the Minister of the Interior (recours hi\u00e9rarchique), and a court action before the territorially competent administrative court (recours contentieux). The gracious and hierarchical appeals ask the administration to think again in the light of fresh documents, a new twelve-month run of payslips, a bigger flat with a conformity report, or the missing translation. The court action asks a judge to annul (annuler) an unlawful refusal, and it can be filed alongside the other two, but within strict time limits that must be checked on the decision itself, so no family should let the letter sit in a drawer while asking friends what to do.<\/p>\n Judges examine refusals closely, and the leading illustration British sponsors should study is a decision of the Nantes administrative court of appeal (cour administrative d’appel) of 26 March 2021, case number 20NT01518 (CAA Nantes, 3rd chamber, 26\/03\/2021, 20NT01518, unpublished in the Lebon collection<\/a>). A Turkish national holding a multi-year card had applied in July 2016 for reunification with his wife and two children. The prefect of Ille-et-Vilaine refused in October 2017 for insufficient resources, then rejected the applicant’s gracious appeal in February 2018 on a new ground: he no longer occupied the flat covered by the original application. The Rennes administrative court upheld the refusal in March 2020 and the court of appeal confirmed. The court recalled the governing rule, then applicable as Article L.411-5 and since recodified: “Le regroupement familial ne peut \u00eatre refus\u00e9 que pour l’un des motifs suivants : \/ 1\u00b0 Le demandeur ne justifie pas de ressources stables et suffisantes pour subvenir aux besoins de sa famille. (…) ; \/ 2\u00b0 Le demandeur ne dispose pas ou ne disposera pas \u00e0 la date d’arriv\u00e9e de sa famille en France d’un logement consid\u00e9r\u00e9 comme normal pour une famille comparable vivant dans la m\u00eame r\u00e9gion g\u00e9ographique ; (…) “. On housing, the judges found that at both decision dates the applicant no longer lived in the flat inspected by the OFII in 2016, that the new lease he produced proved surface only, and that neither a conformity opinion nor any evidence on comfort and habitability supported it: “l’int\u00e9ress\u00e9 ne r\u00e9sidait plus dans le logement ayant fait l’objet d’une enqu\u00eate de conformit\u00e9” and “n’\u00e9tablit ni que son logement aurait fait l’objet d’un avis de conformit\u00e9, ni que les conditions pr\u00e9cit\u00e9es seraient remplies”. The appeal was rejected in full and the associated claims for an injunction and costs failed with it.<\/p>\n The practical lessons for a British sponsor are direct. First, do not move house in the middle of the examination without immediately sending the OFII and the prefecture the new lease plus the full technical description of the new flat, because the file the prefect judges is the file as it stands on decision day. Second, surface evidence alone never suffices: chase the mayoral inspection or the OFII visit until a written conformity opinion exists, and keep proof of every appointment. Third, attack the real ground of refusal rather than relitigating everything: where resources are short, refile with twelve complete months and the spouse’s income added; where housing fails, refile from a compliant flat rather than asking a judge to bless a cramped one. Fourth, remember that the judge reviews the refusal as it stood when taken, so documents created after the decision usually belong in a fresh application or a gracious appeal, not in the court bundle alone.<\/p>\n Where reunification proper is closed, one safety net sometimes remains: the one-year temporary card for private and family life granted outside the standard categories. The statute states: “L’\u00e9tranger qui n’entre pas dans les cat\u00e9gories pr\u00e9vues aux articles L. 423-1, L. 423-7, L. 423-14, L. 423-15, L. 423-21 et L. 423-22 ou dans celles qui ouvrent droit au regroupement familial, et qui dispose de liens personnels et familiaux en France tels que le refus d’autoriser son s\u00e9jour porterait \u00e0 son droit au respect de sa vie priv\u00e9e et familiale une atteinte disproportionn\u00e9e au regard des motifs du refus, se voit d\u00e9livrer une carte de s\u00e9jour temporaire portant la mention ” vie priv\u00e9e et familiale ” d’une dur\u00e9e d’un an, sans que soit opposable la condition pr\u00e9vue \u00e0 l’article L. 412-1.” That is Article L.423-23 CESEDA<\/a>, the exceptional admission to residence (admission exceptionnelle au s\u00e9jour). In English: a foreign national outside the standard boxes, including reunification, whose personal and family ties in France are such that refusing residence would disproportionately harm their right to private and family life, receives a one-year private-and-family-life card, with no long-stay visa required. This is a discretionary, demanding route that weighs the intensity, age and stability of ties, living conditions, integration including knowledge of the values of the Republic, and the strength of links with the country of origin. It never rewards a file built on false statements, and it works best where the family can show years of genuine shared life in France, a schooled child and a clean record, rather than a recently arranged situation.<\/p>\n The second crisis scenario hits families who skipped the consulate queue: a spouse, adult child or partner who joined the sponsor in France on a visit, stayed on, and is then stopped, checked, or refused a permit at the prefecture counter. The administration can then issue an order to leave France, usually with a voluntary departure period (d\u00e9lai de d\u00e9part volontaire) or, where it considers the risk of absconding high, without delay, sometimes alongside a ban on returning (interdiction de retour sur le territoire fran\u00e7ais). The legal bases are listed in Article L.611-1 CESEDA<\/a>: “L’autorit\u00e9 administrative peut obliger un \u00e9tranger \u00e0 quitter le territoire fran\u00e7ais lorsqu’il se trouve dans les cas suivants : 1\u00b0 L’\u00e9tranger, ne pouvant justifier \u00eatre entr\u00e9 r\u00e9guli\u00e8rement sur le territoire fran\u00e7ais, s’y est maintenu sans \u00eatre titulaire d’un titre de s\u00e9jour en cours de validit\u00e9 ; 2\u00b0 L’\u00e9tranger, entr\u00e9 sur le territoire fran\u00e7ais sous couvert d’un visa d\u00e9sormais expir\u00e9 ou, n’\u00e9tant pas soumis \u00e0 l’obligation du visa, entr\u00e9 en France plus de trois mois auparavant, s’est maintenu sur le territoire fran\u00e7ais sans \u00eatre titulaire d’un titre de s\u00e9jour ou, le cas \u00e9ch\u00e9ant, sans demander le renouvellement du titre de s\u00e9jour temporaire ou pluriannuel qui lui a \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9livr\u00e9 ; 3\u00b0 L’\u00e9tranger s’est vu refuser la d\u00e9livrance d’un titre de s\u00e9jour, le renouvellement du titre de s\u00e9jour, du document provisoire d\u00e9livr\u00e9 \u00e0 l’occasion d’une demande de titre de s\u00e9jour ou de l’autorisation provisoire de s\u00e9jour qui lui avait \u00e9t\u00e9 d\u00e9livr\u00e9 ou s’est vu retirer un de ces documents ;”. In short, unlawful entry, expired visa with no permit, or a refused or withdrawn permit can each trigger the order, and the third case is exactly what follows a failed residence application at the prefecture.<\/p>\n Every such order must still be lawful in form and proportionate in substance. On form, Article L.613-1 CESEDA<\/a> requires: “La d\u00e9cision portant obligation de quitter le territoire fran\u00e7ais est motiv\u00e9e. Elle est \u00e9dict\u00e9e apr\u00e8s v\u00e9rification du droit au s\u00e9jour, en tenant notamment compte de la dur\u00e9e de pr\u00e9sence de l’\u00e9tranger sur le territoire fran\u00e7ais, de la nature et de l’anciennet\u00e9 de ses liens avec la France et des consid\u00e9rations humanitaires pouvant justifier un tel droit.” The order must be reasoned and may only follow a genuine check of the right to stay, weighing length of presence, nature and age of ties with France, and humanitarian considerations. On challenges, Article L.614-1 CESEDA<\/a> provides: “La d\u00e9cision portant obligation de quitter le territoire fran\u00e7ais ainsi que la d\u00e9cision relative au s\u00e9jour, la d\u00e9cision relative au d\u00e9lai de d\u00e9part volontaire et l’interdiction de retour sur le territoire fran\u00e7ais qui l’accompagnent, le cas \u00e9ch\u00e9ant, peuvent \u00eatre contest\u00e9es devant le tribunal administratif selon la proc\u00e9dure pr\u00e9vue \u00e0 l’article L. 911-1.” The removal order, the residence decision behind it, the departure period and any return ban can be contested together before the administrative court. Deadlines are brutally short and are counted in days or weeks depending on the type of order, which is why the only safe reflex on receiving such papers is to photograph every page, note the exact date and time of service, and instruct a lawyer the same day.<\/p>\nB. The Three Conditions Tested by the OFII, the Mayor and the Prefect<\/h3>\n
II. What If the Prefect Says No or the Police Order Your Family Member Out of France?<\/h2>\n
A. How to Challenge a Refusal of Family Reunification Before the Administrative Court<\/h3>\n
B. How to Fight an Order to Leave France Served on a Spouse, Partner or Child Already in France<\/h3>\n