You are here
Home › Credibility assessment ›EDAL case summaries
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.
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.
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...
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...
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).
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.
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.
Granting someone a refugee status for fear of persecution based on belonging to a social group due to his sexual orientation, cannot be linked to the fact that his sexual orientation has, or not, been made public. Indeed, a social group is instituted by how society perceive those in the group.
An individual applying for asylum does not have, in order to avoid persecutions in his country, to hide his sexual orientation.
In order to prove the risk of persecution, there is no requirement that belonging to a social group based on sexual orientation must be prohibited by any...
The applicant, who had deserted the Syrian army, was seen in isolation covered by the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (1) [refugee status]. However, the Board found serious reasons to assume that the applicant had committed a crime against humanity and war crimes during his military service and consequently he was excluded from protection. Nevertheless, the Danish Aliens Act Art. 31, (2) is an obstacle to his expulsion as he would risk persecution covered by the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (1) in the case of returning to Syria.
This Court case confirms the obligation on the part of the decision-maker to make a clear finding regarding the applicant’s ethnicity, and to conduct a forward-looking assessment when assessing the well-founded nature of his fear.
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 58
- Country of origin information 49
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 45
- Subsidiary Protection 42
- Membership of a particular social group 40
- Internal protection 34
- Well-founded fear 32
- Burden of proof 30
- Refugee Status 30
- Relevant Documentation 25
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 24
- Real risk 24
- Persecution (acts of) 23
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 22
- Standard of proof 21
- Religion 20
- Benefit of doubt 19
- Procedural guarantees 19
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 18
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 18
- Personal circumstances of applicant 18
- Political Opinion 18
- Previous persecution 17
- Gender Based Persecution 16
- Effective remedy (right to) 15
- Individual assessment 15
- Obligation to give reasons 15
- Sexual orientation 15
- Child Specific Considerations 14
- Country of origin 14
- Relevant Facts 14
- Individual threat 13
- Personal interview 13
- Serious harm 13
- Torture 13
- Protection 11
- Indiscriminate violence 10
- Refugee sur place 10
- Unaccompanied minor 10
- Duty of applicant 9
- Non-refoulement 9
- Internal armed conflict 8
- Actors of protection 7
- Effective access to procedures 7
- Accelerated procedure 6
- Armed conflict 6
- Discrimination 6
- Humanitarian considerations 6
- Subsequent application 6
- Best interest of the child 5
- Manifestly unfounded application 5
- Safe country of origin 5
- Vulnerable person 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
- Female genital mutilation 3
- Nationality 3
- Return 3
- Trafficking in human beings 3
- Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN 2
- Death penalty / Execution 2
- Delay 2
- Family member 2
- Family reunification 2
- Final decision 2
- First country of asylum 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
- Dependant (Dependent person) 1
- Dublin Transfer 1
- Family unity (right to) 1
- Inadmissible application 1
- Reception conditions 1
- Serious non-political crime 1
- War crimes 1
Filter by date
Filter by country of applicant
- Iran 24
- Somalia 22
- Afghanistan 20
- Iraq 15
- 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
- Nepal 1
- Niger 1
- Russia (Chechnya) 1
- Senegal 1
- Tanzania 1
- Unknown 1
- Uzbekistan 1
- Zimbabwe 1
Filter by country of decision
- Ireland 31
- United Kingdom 17
- Belgium 16
- Sweden 15
- Hungary 13
- Greece 12
- Austria 7
- Germany 7
- Netherlands 6
- Denmark 5
- Finland 5
- Spain 5
- Italy 4
- Poland 4
- Slovakia 4
- Switzerland 4
- Czech Republic 3
- Slovenia 3
- France 2
- Luxembourg 1