EDAL case summaries
Country of Decision: France
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Detention, Health (right to), Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect)
M. Haghbin, an Iranian student having multiple sclerosis, had been expelled back to Iran by a Prefect’s decree ordering him to leave France.
By order, the Judge (of interim urgent measures) of the administrative court of Limoges concluded that there had been a serious and immediate breach of the right to an effective appeal as well as a serious and immediate breach of the right to personal liberty.
As a result, (i) the Prefect of Haute-Vienne and the Prefect of Vaucluse were ordered to organise the return of M. Haghbin to France as soon as possible and at the...
Date: 25-07-2016
Country of Decision: France
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Procedural guarantees
An asylum seeker who was interviewed by telephone during his detention in the waiting zone by an officer of the French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (OFPRA) in premises which were not subject to OFPRA’s director general’s prior approval has not benefited from the appropriate procedural guarantees attached to the examination of his application.
Consequently, the Ministry of Interior’s order rejecting Mr D’s request to enter the French territory, which was taken in light of an OFPRA opinion given in such circumstances, must be annulled.
Date: 06-07-2016
Country of Decision: France
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN, Exclusion from protection, Terrorism, Well-founded fear
The exclusion of a person who had belonged to a terrorist organisation depended on a personal examination to see whether there were genuine grounds to attribute to him a personal responsibility as organiser, author or accomplice to serious crimes under ordinary law or actions contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Date: 05-04-2012
Country of Decision: France
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Dublin Transfer, Family member, Family unity (right to), Humanitarian considerations, Responsibility for examining application
The presence of an adult asylum applicant’s sibling in an EU Member State entails no obligation for that State to apply Art 7 Dublin Regulation, as siblings are not included in the definition of family members in Art 2(i). This was the case even though the applicant’s brother had been granted refugee status and, subsequently, citizenship in France.
Date: 02-03-2007
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN 1
- Detention 1
- Dublin Transfer 1
- Exclusion from protection 1
- Family member 1
- Family unity (right to) 1
- Health (right to) 1
- Humanitarian considerations 1
- Procedural guarantees 1
- Responsibility for examining application 1
- Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect) 1
- Terrorism 1
- Well-founded fear 1
Filter by country of applicant
Filter by country of decision
- (-) Remove France filterFrance
