EDAL case summaries
A national decision maker must pay close attention to a United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) decision when determining an application for asylum. Such a decision does not create a presumption, however, substantive countervailing reasons are required to justify the decision maker coming to a different decision to the UNHCR.
Appeal against the General Secretary of the Ministry of Public Order's negative decision no 95/52986 of 28.4.2006 on a claim for asylum before the Appeal Committees formed pursuant to Articles 26 & 32 of Presidential Decree 114/2010 and the Minister of Citizen Protection's decision 5401/3-505533 of 7.11.2011 (385/8-11-2011 FEK YODD) pursuant to which the present Committee was formed.
This case involved a fear of persecution because of religious beliefs (atheism) as well as because of membership of a particular social group (personality shaped in a non-Islamic society /...
The Court obliged the Respondent to conduct new proceedings as it expressed an opinion on the Claimant’s state of health without appointing an expert.
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Relevant Documentation filterRelevant Documentation
- Credibility assessment 2
- Relevant Facts 2
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 1
- Actors of protection 1
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 1
- Country of origin information 1
- Discrimination 1
- Internal protection 1
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 1
- Membership of a particular social group 1
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 1
- Persecution (acts of) 1
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 1
- Protection 1
- Real risk 1
- Refugee Status 1
- Religion 1
- Subsidiary Protection 1
- Unaccompanied minor 1
- Well-founded fear 1
Filter by country of applicant
- Afghanistan 1
- Iran 1
- Nigeria 1
Filter by country of decision
- Greece 1
- Hungary 1
- United Kingdom 1