Latest News


UK: R on the application of ZAT and others v. Secretary of State for the Home Department

Date: 
Thursday, January 21, 2016

This case was a judicial review test case before the Upper Tribunal (UT) concerning seven Syrian applicants. Four were living in the unofficial camp near Calais known as ‘the Jungle’, infamous for its conditions of squalor, as recently criticised by the Lille Administrative Tribunal.

Belgium: CALL annuls Dublin III transfer to France due to inadequate assessment of effectiveness of access to healthcare for asylum seekers

Date: 
Thursday, January 14, 2016

This case relates to an Algerian national who claimed asylum in Belgium on 18 May 2015. After a ‘take charge’ request, the French authorities agreed to accept responsibility for his application pursuant to Article 12(2) of the Dublin III Regulation. The Belgian authorities therefore issued a decision refusing to grant the applicant entry and issued an order for him to leave the territory.
 

CJEU: Advocate General opinion, Case C-47/15 Affum v Prefet du Pas de Calais

Date: 
Tuesday, February 2, 2016
Case C-47/15 relates to a national of Ghana, Ms Affum, who was intercepted by French police on 22 March 2013 at Coquelles, the entrance of the Channel tunnel, while transiting through French territory on a bus from Belgium to the UK. She had no identity documents except a Belgian passport with the name and photo of another person.

Latest Cases


Country of Applicant: Tunisia , Keywords: Detention, Effective access to procedures, Effective remedy (right to), Individual assessment, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Procedural guarantees , Date of Decision: 01-09-2015

The Court found that three nationals of Tunisia had been unlawfully detained upon arrival in Italy, first in a reception centre and then on board ships, where they were not provided information and had no opportunity to challenge their detention.

In addition, the conditions in the reception centre amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment.

Finally, the Court found that the applicants had been subject to collective expulsion, as despite being identified individually and being issued with separate repatriation decrees, their individual circumstances had not been genuinely considered prior to their return to Tunisia. 

Country of Decision: Ireland , Country of Applicant: Brazil , Keywords: Best interest of the child, Child Specific Considerations, Family member, Family unity (right to) , Date of Decision: 30-07-2015

Non-Citizen children of the State have rights protected by the Constitution when in the State, including rights under Article 41, 42 and 40.3. However, the right to reside in the State is a protection under Article 40.3 which is reserved for Irish citizen children. It is the citizenship of the child that confers this right to live in the State under Article 40.3.

The best interests of the child are considerations that must be assessed when deciding upon a deportation order for a child. However, as the Convention on the Rights of Child has been ratified by Ireland but has not been implemented as part of domestic law, the Court is not bound to view the best interests of the child as the primary consideration.

Country of Decision: Ireland , Country of Applicant: Nigeria , Keywords: Child Specific Considerations, Family member, Family unity (right to) , Date of Decision: 30-07-2015

The right to private life under Article 8 ECHR can involve social and community ties in the host State. The right to private life involves an assessment of a person’s right to moral and physical integrity. Where such rights are engaged a decision relating to the removal of a person from the State must be assessed against the gravity of the consequences on such ties.

When considering if the right to respect for private life is engaged in relation to an individual who has never been permitted to reside in the host State (other than pending a decision on an asylum claim), it is permissible to take into account that the private life developed at a time when the right of the individual to remain in the State is precarious.

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 17 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).