Latest News


ECtHR Communicated cases: E.S. v Spain; Hannan and Kirakosyan v Netherlands; S.S. v Russia; S.W. v Russia

Date: 
Tuesday, September 6, 2016

E.S. v. Spain (no. 13273/16), communicated 25 August 2016

Netherlands: District Court rules the ministerial regulation designating FYROM as a safe country of origin non-binding

Date: 
Monday, September 19, 2016

On 19 September 2016, the District Court of The Hague ruled upon the designation of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) as a safe country of origin.
 
The case relates to the asylum applications from a Macedonian family, members of the Romani community.

Italy: Council of State suspends Dublin transfers to Bulgaria and Hungary

Date: 
Tuesday, September 27, 2016

The Italian Council of State has delivered its first judgments suspending transfers of asylum seekers to Hungary and Bulgaria under the Dublin Regulation, to prevent violations of fundamental rights

Hungary: in Judgment 4004/2016

Latest Cases


Country of Decision: Poland , Keywords: Freedom of movement (right to), Residence document, Return , Date of Decision: 02-06-2016

Internal borders of the EU Schengen zone can be crossed without submitting persons to any border control. However it does not mean that a third country national is not subject to any requirements while crossing the border. Interpretation of the Schengen Border Code, the Convention applying the Schengen Agreement and the Law on Foreigners leads to a conclusion that the third country national should hold a passport and a residence card while crossing the border. Holding these documents beyond doubt means possessing them, ie carrying them.

Country of Decision: Spain , Country of Applicant: Kazakhstan , Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Effective remedy (right to), Protection , Date of Decision: 23-02-2015

The Supreme Court declared that the National High Court erred when annulling the decision of the General Sub-Directorate for Asylum (Ministry of Interior) to reject the Appellant’s request for international protection. The National High Court annulled the decision but did not consider the Appellant’s core claim: the request for international protection.

As the National High Court was in possession of all necessary facts required to decide on the substance of the request by the Appellant for international protection, it should have been able to determine as such. As a result, the Supreme Court upheld the appeal.

Country of Applicant: Sudan , Keywords: Country of origin information, Female genital mutilation, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Non-state actors/agents of persecution, Political Opinion, Real risk, Refugee Status , Date of Decision: 07-06-2016

The return of a third country national woman or girl to a country where female genital mutilation is traditionally practised is not a breach of Art. 3 of the Convention where her family (including her possible husband) has the will and the possibility to ensure that she will not be subjected to that practice. 

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).