You are here
Home › Accelerated procedure › Effective remedy (right to) › European Union Law › Procedural guarantees ›EDAL case summaries
Country of Applicant: Bangladesh
Keywords: Accelerated procedure, Detention, Effective access to procedures, Effective remedy (right to), Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Procedural guarantees, Safe third country
When State Parties do not examine an application for international protection in its mertis based on a safe third country clause, Article 3 still requires that they apply a thorough and comprehensive legal procedure to assess the existence of such risk by looking into updated sources regarding the situation in the receiving third country. Hungary violated Article 3 by failing to conduct an efficient and adequate assessment when applying the safe third country clause for Serbia.
Article 5 cannot be considered as ratione materiae...
Date: 21-11-2019
Country of Decision: United Kingdom
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Accelerated procedure, Access to the labour market, Detention, Dublin Transfer, Effective access to procedures, Effective remedy (right to), Final decision, Health (right to), Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid, Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports, Non-refoulement, Obligation to give reasons, Procedural guarantees, Request to take back, Return, Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect), Safe third country, Standard of proof, Subsequent application
The case concerns three unconnected Iranian nationals who unsuccessfully claimed asylum in the Republic of Cyprus then came to the UK where they made asylum claims. A further right to appeal remained with the Cypriot Supreme Court. The case is a challenge by the applicants to the SSHD’s refusal to decide their asylum claims substantively; certification of their asylum claims on safe third country grounds; and certification of their human rights claims as clearly unfounded.
The Court concluded that there was no real risk that the...
Date: 01-03-2016
Country of Applicant: Sudan
Keywords: Accelerated procedure, Credibility assessment, Effective access to procedures, Effective remedy (right to), Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid, Non-refoulement, Personal interview, Procedural guarantees, Refugee Status, Relevant Facts, Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect), Torture
The detention of asylum applicants may undermine their ability to claim asylum and that an ‘effective remedy’ requires an appeal with suspensive effect against refoulement in order to prevent irreparable harm, sufficient time to prepare the appeal and effective legal assistance and interpretation.
Date: 02-05-2012
Country of Decision: Belgium
Country of Applicant: Russia
Keywords: Inadmissible application, Accelerated procedure, Assessment of facts and circumstances, Dublin Transfer, Request to take back, Responsibility for examining application, Effective access to procedures, Effective remedy (right to), Procedural guarantees, Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect), Detention
With this judgment, the General Assembly of CALL is trying to bring its case law in line with the M.S.S. judgment of the ECtHR.
The CALL set the conditions under which an appeal for suspension against an enforceable decision (an order to leave the territory) has automatic suspensive effect.
After a prima facie examination (in extreme urgency), the CALL decided that the applicant in this casehas a reasonable ground of appeal on the basis of Article 3 of the ECHR, as he gave sufficient indications of the concrete problems he was experiencing in Poland. The CALL derived...
Date: 17-02-2011
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
- EN - Asylum Procedures Directive, Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005 2
- EN - Dublin II Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003 2
- EN - Recast Asylum Procedures Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council 2
- EN - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union 1
- EN - Dublin III Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No. 604/2013 of 26 June 2013 (recast Dublin II Regulation) 1
- EN - Recast Reception Conditions Directive, Directive 2013/33/EU of 26 June 2013 1
- EN - Returns Directive, Directive 2008/115/EC of 16 December 2008 1
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Accelerated procedure filterAccelerated procedure
- (-) Remove Effective remedy (right to) filterEffective remedy (right to)
- (-) Remove Procedural guarantees filterProcedural guarantees
- Effective access to procedures 4
- Detention 3
- Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect) 3
- Dublin Transfer 2
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2
- Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid 2
- Non-refoulement 2
- Request to take back 2
- Safe third country 2
- Access to the labour market 1
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 1
- Credibility assessment 1
- Final decision 1
- Health (right to) 1
- Inadmissible application 1
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 1
- Obligation to give reasons 1
- Personal interview 1
- Refugee Status 1
- Relevant Facts 1
- Responsibility for examining application 1
- Return 1
- Standard of proof 1
- Subsequent application 1
- Torture 1
Filter by country of applicant
- Bangladesh 1
- Iran 1
- Russia 1
- Sudan 1
