EDAL case summaries
The Migration Court committed serious breaches of procedure in an asylum case (in which grounds arising sur place were cited), as the Court failed to respond to all requests, state its assessment of political activity sur place, or communicate important written documents.
This case concerned the assessment and reason given that the Applicant had not been subjected to “serious harm” in the past, in circumstances where the decision was unclear as to whether the finding was to the effect that his account was not believed, or whether, if believed, the harm was not inflicted by persons who were "actors of serious harm". The Court also considered the definition of “actors of serious harm.” Thirdly, the Court considered whether the decision-maker ignored the specific claim made in the application that returned asylum seekers face a risk of detention,...
A well-founded fear of persecution may also be based on events that took place after the Applicant left his country of origin (refugee sur place). Sur place evidence refers to circumstances which arose after the Applicant left his country of origin and which are as a rule connected with a change in the situation in the country of origin, but one cannot exclude other events which are closely linked with the person applying for refugee status and which occurred after he left his country of origin.
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Procedural guarantees filterProcedural guarantees
- (-) Remove Refugee sur place filterRefugee sur place
- Political Opinion 2
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 1
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 1
- Credibility assessment 1
- Individual assessment 1
- Individual threat 1
- Non-refoulement 1
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 1
- Persecution (acts of) 1
- Previous persecution 1
- Protection 1
- Relevant Documentation 1
- Serious harm 1
- Subsidiary Protection 1