Luxembourg - Administrative Court, 31663C, 7 February 2013

Country of Decision:
Country of Applicant:
Date of Decision:
Court Name:
Administrative Court
National / Other Legislative Provisions:
Luxembourg - o Law of 05 May 2006 : articles 2 and 37
Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version

Based solely on a 2012 UNHCR report, subsidiary protection was granted to the applicant as an individual risk to his life was recognised.


On 28 June 2010, the applicant lodged his asylum request, which was rejected by the Ministry on 30 March 2012.

The applicant decided to appeal this decision. 

Decision & Reasoning: 

The court based its entire appreciation of the situation of a 2012 UNHCR report in order to establish that the security situation in Iraq is that of blind violence during an internal armed conflict.

Indeed, the court relied on the information from this report in order to conclude that the applicant would be individually targeted by this “blind violence” because of the applicant’s place of birth, place of residence, membership of a particular political group and because of the applicant’s profession (teacher), which is especially at risk of violence.  


In its decision, the administrative court granted the applicant subsidiary protection. 


Even before the 2017 decisions, the court displayed flexibility with regards to applicants from Iraq, not by granting them refugee status but by recognising with ease (for instance by solely basing itself on the UNHCR report) that the applicant would be at risk of death should he be returned to his country of origin.

In short, it may be opportune to use this case in the context of an appeal in order to underline the continuity of the administrative jurisprudence regarding Iraqi applicants and the protracted nature of violence recognised by the court in 2013. 

The original version of this case summary was completed by Passerell a.s.b.l. and translated by Jessica Pradille.