Latest News


UK: Supreme Court reiterates that a refugee cannot be removed until claim is assessed

Date: 
Friday, March 19, 2021

On 19 March 2021, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom handed down its judgment in G v G [2021] UKSC 9. The case concerns G, an eight-year-old national of South Africa whose mother applied for international protection in the UK listing G as a dependent and whose father had brought international child abduction proceedings for under the Hague Convention the breach of his right to custody of his child.

C-768/19: AG Hogan gives opinion on the point at which a person’s ‘minor’ status is assessed in order to determine whether that minor and another person are ‘family members’

Date: 
Thursday, March 25, 2021

On 25 March 2021, AG Hogan published an opinion in Bundesrepublik Deutschland v SE (C‑768/19). The request for preliminary ruling arises in proceedings between S.E and the Federal Republic of Germany concerning the refus

Communicated case against Poland

Date: 
Friday, March 26, 2021

Z.E. and Others v Poland (Application no. 4457/18) concerns the applicant Z.E and her four children, who are Russian nationals of Chechen origin. In 2013, the applicants were stopped while crossing the Polish border with Z.E’s husband. Various sets of asylum proceedings ensued and ultimately ended in a refusal.

Latest Cases


Country of Applicant: Nigeria

The conditions of detention amounted to a violation of Article 3, in so far as the applicant remained in isolation, in a container with inadequate natural light and ventilation, for a significant amount of time and without any consideration of alternatives. The applicant’s unnecessary placement in a part of the detention facility that was reserved for Covid-19 quarantine also exposed him to health risk.

The applicant’s detention was not lawful under Article 5 (1) ECHR, as it lasted for fourteen months, the authorities were aware that the deportation was not feasible and failed to pursue the matter with diligence. Article 34 was also violated due to irregularities in the manner that legal aid was provided to the applicant and the lack of confidentiality and support during his communication with the Court while he was in detention.

Country of Applicant: Unknown

Member States are required to take due account of the best interests of the child before adopting a return decision accompanied by an entry ban, even where the person to whom that decision is addressed is not a minor but his or her father.

Country of Applicant: Afghanistan

The European Court of Human Rights ruled that the removal of families belonging to the Sikh religious minority to Afghanistan would not constitute a violation of Article 3 ECHR, as the applicants’ situation failed to reach the severity threshold required by this Article. Despite the fact that the Sikh community suffers from intimidation and intolerance within the Afghan society, the Court did not find that this group is the target of a practice of a systematic practice of ill-treatment, despite any difficulties they may be facing in the country.

About EDAL


The European Database of Asylum Law (EDAL) is an online database managed by the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) and a compilation of summaries of refugee and asylum case law from the courts of 22 European 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 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 Stavros Papageorgopoulos (spapageorgopoulos@ecre.org).