You are here

Home › Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports › Previous persecution ›

EDAL case summaries

Austria – Federal Administrative Court, 24. August 2015, W149 1433213-1/29E

Country of Decision: Austria
Country of Applicant: Somalia
Keywords: Actor of persecution or serious harm, Assessment of facts and circumstances, Country of origin information, Credibility assessment, Individual assessment, Internal protection, Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid, Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports, Membership of a particular social group, Non-state actors/agents of persecution, Previous persecution, Real risk, Refugee Status, Subsidiary Protection, Well-founded fear

If an appellant provides substantiated reasons that call into question the consideration of evidence in the administrative proceedings, the facts cannot be regarded as “well established on basis of the records in combination with the complaint”. Thus, an oral hearing has to be held. The same applies if there is a necessity to consider up-to-date country of origin information as well as an up-to-date medical report due to the long duration of the judicial proceedings.

In the opinion of the court, the absence of a legal representative in the oral hearing, in spite of an explicit...
Date: 24-08-2015

ECtHR - R.J. v. France, Application No. 10466/11

Country of Applicant: Sri Lanka
Keywords: Burden of proof, Credibility assessment, Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports, Personal circumstances of applicant, Previous persecution, Relevant Documentation

The French authorities’ failure to conduct an adequate inquiry into the Applicant’s medical evidence resulted their dismissal of the credibility of the Tamil applicant, who, according to the ECtHR, would face a real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 if returned to Sri Lanka.
Date: 19-09-2013

Ireland - High Court, 28 September 2010, R.M.K. (DRC) v Refugee Appeals Tribunal and Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform 2010 IEHC 367

Country of Decision: Ireland
Country of Applicant: Congo (DRC)
Keywords: Credibility assessment, Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports, Previous persecution, Persecution (acts of), Torture

This case concerned the consideration of expert medical evidence by asylum decision makers and the link with the assessment of credibility. The Court found that the Refugee Appeals Tribunal failed adequately to consider strong medical evidence relating to torture in assessing the overall credibility of the applicant’s refugee claim. The Court also found that it is incumbent upon the asylum decision maker to give reasons for rejecting the contents of medico-legal reports, especially those with a high probative value.
Date: 28-09-2010

Filter by case summary type

Filter by applicable legal provisions

Filter by date

Filter by country of applicant

Filter by country of decision