• This blog assess the gaps present in the Qualification Directive with regards to refugees with disabilities. Persons with disabilities are neither included within the definition of Particular Social Group nor are they accomodated for in the definition given to acts of persecution in the Directive. Given that EU Member States are bound by the international obligations of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, this blog calls upon the EU to take into account the specific situation of refugees with disabilities and provide a framework for protection that is in line with the Convention. 

  • The Supreme Court of Republic Slovenia has referred a request for a preliminary ruling to the CJEU on the interpretation to be given to Articles 3 and 17 of the Dublin III Regulation in the case that concerns a transfer to Croatia under the Dublin III Regulation.

  • The Belgian Council for Alien Law Litigation has referred a series of questions to the Court of Justice on the application and interpretation to be given to Article 25(1) of the Visa Code.

  • The blog aims to demonstrate that the system of self-identification of vulnerable persons in the international protection proceedings, applicable in Poland prior to the transposition of the recast Procedure and Reception Directives, can give rise to breaches of Article 5 of the ECHR. It also examines the possible impact of the post-transposition legal framework in Poland on detention practices for those who are vulnerable.

  • The navigation and use of Country of Origin information by the European Court of Human Rights has been, up until now, a relatively unexplored area. This blog, however, examines in depth how the ECtHR has established a specific framework on the use of COI in its own case law, namely the collection, assessment, and determination of COI. Whilst this framework has been created by the Court itself it rarely abides by it, leading to a COI methodology which is porous and contradictory and a judgment which determines the fate of the individual as well as State practice elsewhere.

Latest News

France: Allowance insufficient for asylum seekers without accommodation

Friday, December 23, 2016

In a judgment of 23 December 2016, the French Council of State examined the appropriateness of the level of the ADA (Allocation pour demandeur d’asileallowance for asylum seekers) for asylum seekers who

The Netherlands: Decrease in number of reception places in Italian SPRAR locations does not prevent transfer of particularly vulnerable foreign nationals to Italy

Friday, December 9, 2016

On 9 December 2016 the Administrative Jurisdiction Division of the Council of State has judged that the decrease in the number of reception places in the Italian SPRAR centers does not prevent the Dublin transfer of extremely vulnerable foreign nationals to Italy.

ECtHR - Abuhmaid v. Ukraine (no. 31183/13) [Articles 8 and 13], 12 January 2017

Thursday, January 12, 2017

On the 12th of January 2017, the European Court of Human Rights gave its ruling in the case of Abuhmaid v. Ukraine (no. 31183/13), concerning a Palestinian national residing in Ukraine.

Latest Cases

Country of Decision: Germany , Country of Applicant: Afghanistan , Keywords: Dublin Transfer, Inadmissible application, Refugee Status, Responsibility for examining application, Subsidiary Protection , Date of Decision: 23-10-2015

The rules of Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (“International Protection Directive”) do not prohibit the review of an application for asylum in Germany in a case where an applicant has previously been granted subsidiary protection in another Member State, if such application for asylum has been filed before 20 July 2015. This is because the inadmissibility of applications filed before 20 July 2015 is governed by the Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005 on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status (“Asylum Procedures Directive”). According to Article 25 of the Asylum Procedures Directive, Member States may consider an application for asylum as inadmissible if another Member State has granted refugee status, but not if another Member State has granted subsidiary protection. 

Country of Decision: Germany , Country of Applicant: Iran , Keywords: Dublin Transfer, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Non-refoulement, Reception conditions, Safe third country , Date of Decision: 02-06-2015

When enforcing the Dublin III Regulation, the deporting country must verify whether the asylum procedure in the intermediary country sufficiently guarantees that the applicant will not be subject to a treatment which violates Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The deportation order was illegitimate due to inadequate conditions for the reception of asylum seekers and recognised refugees in Greece and the serious risk of inhuman or degrading treatment for asylum seekers and recognised refugees in Greece.


Country of Decision: Germany , Country of Applicant: Somalia , Keywords: Inadmissible application, Refugee Status, Relevant Facts, Subsidiary Protection , Date of Decision: 04-08-2016

An application for asylum filed prior to 20 July 2015 cannot be considered inadmissible because subsidiary protection has already been granted by another Member State (if the protection applied for is more favourable than the existing protection). The assessment of the admissibility of an application for asylum filed prior to 20 July 2015 is subject to the laws, regulations and administrative provisions adopted pursuant to the now superseded Asylum Procedures Directive (Directive 2005/85/EU) which provided for inadmissibility of an application for asylum if refugee status had already been granted by another Member State. 

About EDAL

The European Database of Asylum Law (EDAL) is an online database co-ordinated by the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) and a compilation of summaries of refugee and asylum case law from the courts of 19 EU Member States, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The summaries are published in English and in the relevant Member State’s national language.

For more information please see here.

If you are interested in contributing an article on a relevant subject to the EDAL blog or would like to inform us about an important national judgment, please kindly send an email to Amanda Taylor (ataylor@ecre.org) or Julia Zelvenska (jzelvenska@ecre.org).