You are here
Home › Credibility assessment ›EDAL case summaries
Country of Applicant: Senegal
Keywords: Country of origin, Credibility assessment, Manifestly unfounded application, Sexual orientation, Well-founded fear
The ECtHR declared inadmissible the complaints brought by a Senegalese national who had unsuccessfully applied for asylum in Spain due to his fear of being persecuted in his country of origin on the grounds of his sexual orientation. The complaints were considered premature since the Audiencia Nacional had annulled the administrative decision rejecting his asylum application and the asylum procedure had started afresh.
Date: 26-09-2017
Country of Decision: United Kingdom
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Benefit of doubt, Child Specific Considerations, Country of origin information, Credibility assessment, Effective access to procedures, Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports, Real risk, Standard of proof, Well-founded fear
Effective access to justice relies on an individual having a voice in the proceedings concerning him or her. Solely focusing on the credibility of the appellant’s account and not having regard to objective evidence testifying to the appellant’s vulnerability or the risk to the appellant of return to Afghanistan has led to the proceedings being neither fair nor just. A material error of law has therefore been committed.
Date: 27-07-2017
Country of Decision: United Kingdom
Country of Applicant: Sri Lanka
Keywords: Actor of persecution or serious harm, Benefit of doubt, Credibility assessment, Duty of applicant, Relevant Documentation, Standard of proof
The Tribunal reasserted the decision maker’s duty of confidentiality in considering documents produced in support of a protection claim. Where there is a needed to make an inquiry in the country of origin then written consent must be given by the applicant. Moreover, Article 22 of the Asylum Procedures Directive prohibits direct contact with the alleged actor of persecution. Additionally, the Refugee Convention requires that the authentication of a document is undertaken with a precautionary approach, namely whether an inquiry is necessary or should be framed in a specific manner and...
Date: 19-07-2017
Country of Decision: Austria
Country of Applicant: Gambia
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Benefit of doubt, Burden of proof, Child Specific Considerations, Credibility assessment, Unaccompanied minor
In case of reasonable doubt, the statement of the applicant for asylum about his or her date of birth has to be viewed as a credible statement.
Date: 27-06-2017
Country of Decision: Luxembourg
Country of Applicant: Algeria
Keywords: Credibility assessment, Unaccompanied minor
The presumption of minority does not apply when bone testing shows the applicant’s majority and when a doctor does not express doubts on the results. The tribunal did not request further tests.
Date: 21-06-2017
Country of Decision: Denmark
Country of Applicant: Somalia
Keywords: Child Specific Considerations, Country of origin information, Credibility assessment, Gender Based Persecution, Refugee Status, Refugee sur place, Revocation of protection status, Subsidiary Protection
The applicant is an ethnic Somali and a Sunni Muslim belonging to the Bon Clan from Mesegawayn in the Galgaduud Region, Somalia. The applicant was originally in 2014 granted subsidiary protection by the Danish Immigration Service under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (2). In February 2017, the Danish Immigration Service revoked the applicant’s subsidiary protection.
The account of the applicant regarding his original application was rejected by the Board due to a lack of credibility.
The majority of the Board found probable that the applicant’s daughter if returned to Somalia...
Date: 19-06-2017
Country of Decision: Denmark
Country of Applicant: Russia
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Credibility assessment, Gender Based Persecution, Real risk, Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect), Subsidiary Protection
The applicant, an ethnic Ingush and a Muslim from Ingushetia, Russia, feared her former husband and his family. She feared they would take her daughter away from her because she ran away with her child. Moreover, the applicant feared her eldest brother as he would marry her off to an elderly man and take her child away and hand the child over to her former husband.
The Refugee Appeals Board did not find that the conflicts between the applicant and her family members were of such nature and intensity to fall under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7. Consequently, the Board upheld the...
Date: 05-04-2017
Country of Decision: Denmark
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Credibility assessment, Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Real risk, Relevant Facts, Religion, Well-founded fear
The applicant, an ethnic Kurd and a Yarsan from Kanehar, Kermanshah, Iran, had performed religious activities aimed at spreading the knowledge of the faith and thereby attracted the attention of the authorities.
The majority of the Board accepted the applicants account and consequently the Board found that the applicant risked persecution because of his Yarsan religious activities and granted refugee status under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (1).
Date: 22-02-2017
Country of Decision: Ireland
Country of Applicant: Congo (DRC)
Keywords: Burden of proof, Country of origin information, Credibility assessment
An application, by way of judicial review, for an order of certiorari to quash the decision of the second named defendant (that being the International Protection Appeals Tribunal) on the basis of the application of the incorrect standard of proof being applied, credibility assessment and disregard of notice of appeal and country of origin information.
Date: 15-02-2017
Country of Decision: Ireland
Keywords: Benefit of doubt, Credibility assessment, Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports
An application seeking leave for judicial review to quash the decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal on the basis of the Tribunal failing to take into account relevant information and a misapplication of Regulation 5(2) of S.I. 518 of 2006.
Date: 13-02-2017
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Credibility assessment filterCredibility assessment
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 59
- Country of origin information 49
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 45
- Subsidiary Protection 43
- Membership of a particular social group 41
- Internal protection 35
- Well-founded fear 32
- Burden of proof 30
- Refugee Status 30
- Relevant Documentation 25
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 24
- Real risk 24
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 23
- Persecution (acts of) 23
- Standard of proof 22
- Religion 20
- Benefit of doubt 19
- Personal circumstances of applicant 19
- Procedural guarantees 19
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 18
- Individual assessment 18
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 18
- Political Opinion 18
- Previous persecution 17
- Child Specific Considerations 16
- Effective remedy (right to) 16
- Gender Based Persecution 16
- Obligation to give reasons 16
- Sexual orientation 16
- Country of origin 14
- Relevant Facts 14
- Serious harm 14
- Individual threat 13
- Personal interview 13
- Torture 13
- Protection 12
- Indiscriminate violence 10
- Refugee sur place 10
- Unaccompanied minor 10
- Duty of applicant 9
- Non-refoulement 9
- Effective access to procedures 8
- Internal armed conflict 8
- Actors of protection 7
- Vulnerable person 7
- Accelerated procedure 6
- Armed conflict 6
- Discrimination 6
- Humanitarian considerations 6
- Safe country of origin 6
- Subsequent application 6
- Best interest of the child 5
- Manifestly unfounded application 5
- Return 5
- Detention 4
- Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid 4
- Obligation/Duty to cooperate 4
- Safe third country 4
- Accommodation centre 3
- Exclusion from protection 3
- Family member 3
- Female genital mutilation 3
- Nationality 3
- Trafficking in human beings 3
- Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN 2
- Death penalty / Execution 2
- Delay 2
- Dependant (Dependent person) 2
- Dublin Transfer 2
- Family reunification 2
- Final decision 2
- First country of asylum 2
- Inadmissible application 2
- Race 2
- Revocation of protection status 2
- Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect) 2
- Access to the labour market 1
- Country of former habitual residence 1
- Crime against humanity 1
- Family unity (right to) 1
- Reception conditions 1
- Responsibility for examining application 1
- Serious non-political crime 1
- War crimes 1
Filter by date
Filter by country of applicant
- Iran 24
- Afghanistan 22
- Somalia 22
- Iraq 16
- Nigeria 12
- Russia 8
- Congo (DRC) 7
- Sudan 6
- Syria 6
- Gambia 5
- Pakistan 4
- Rwanda 4
- Sri Lanka 4
- Bangladesh 3
- Cameroon 3
- Colombia 3
- Guinea 3
- Albania 2
- Algeria 2
- Belarus 2
- China 2
- Eritrea 2
- Libya 2
- Sierra Leone 2
- South Africa 2
- Turkey 2
- Uganda 2
- Angola 1
- Bosnia and Herzegovina 1
- Burkina Faso 1
- Burundi 1
- Central African Republic 1
- Egypt 1
- Ethiopia 1
- Gabon 1
- Ghana 1
- Ivory Coast 1
- Kazakhstan 1
- Kenya 1
- Kosovo 1
- Kuwait 1
- Lebanon 1
- Mauritania 1
- Mongolia 1
- Morocco 1
- Nepal 1
- Niger 1
- Russia (Chechnya) 1
- Senegal 1
- Tanzania 1
- Unknown 1
- Uzbekistan 1
- Zimbabwe 1
Filter by country of decision
- Ireland 31
- Belgium 17
- United Kingdom 17
- Sweden 15
- Hungary 13
- Greece 12
- Austria 9
- Germany 7
- Netherlands 6
- Denmark 5
- Finland 5
- Italy 5
- Spain 5
- Poland 4
- Slovakia 4
- Switzerland 4
- Czech Republic 3
- Slovenia 3
- France 2
- Luxembourg 1
