EDAL case summaries
Country of Decision: Belgium
Country of Applicant: Palestinian Territory
Keywords: Accelerated procedure, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports, Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect), Visa
The applicant challenged the Belgian Minister of Asylum and Migration’s decision not to grant him a humanitarian visa via an emergency application before the CALL. He relied on the following grounds: inter alia, (i) his medical condition and (ii) the poor living conditions of the West Bank in Palestine.
The CALL decided (i) these two elements justified an urgent decision, (ii) there was a risk of serious prejudice which would be difficult to remedy if the Minister’s decision was enforced, and (iii) there were serious grounds for invalidating the Minister’s decision since...
Date: 25-05-2016
Country of Decision: Belgium
Country of Applicant: Serbia
Keywords: Accelerated procedure, Effective remedy (right to), Safe country of origin
An action for annulment before the Council for Alien Law Litigation was not an effective remedy. The Law of 15 March 2012 limiting the remedy against a decision rejecting an asylum application to an action for annulment when the Applicant came from a safe country of origin, whereas other applicants were able to seek a ‘full-remedy action’, breached the principle of equality and non-discrimination enshrined in Articles 10 and 11 of the Belgian Constitution. The said Law was therefore repealed by the Constitutional Court.
Date: 16-01-2014
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
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Accelerated procedure filterAccelerated procedure
- Effective remedy (right to) 2
- Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect) 2
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 1
- Detention 1
- Dublin Transfer 1
- Effective access to procedures 1
- Inadmissible application 1
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 1
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 1
- Procedural guarantees 1
- Request to take back 1
- Responsibility for examining application 1
- Safe country of origin 1
- Visa 1
Filter by country of applicant
Filter by country of decision
- (-) Remove Belgium filterBelgium
