EDAL case summaries
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: Germany
Keywords: Benefit of doubt, Burden of proof, Dublin Transfer, Effective remedy (right to), First country of asylum, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Reception conditions, Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect), Safe third country
An Applicant’s interest in remaining in a Member State pending a final decision on his asylum status prevails over the public’s interest in immediate enforcement of an ordered transfer if the appropriate asylum procedure of an Applicant in the country to which the Applicant would be deported cannot be ensured (Hungary).
Date: 02-10-2015
Country of Decision: Germany
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Benefit of doubt, Dublin Transfer, First country of asylum, Humanitarian considerations, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Non-refoulement, Reception conditions, Return, Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect), Safe third country
An Applicant’s interest in remaining in a Member State prevails over the public’s interest in deporting the Applicant to the Member State in which the Applicant first sought asylum if there is a predominant degree of likelihood that the Applicant will be subject to inhuman or degrading treatment in the other Member State (e.g. because of significant capacity problems and a change to its asylum law).
Date: 04-09-2015
Country of Decision: Ireland
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Benefit of doubt, Country of origin information, Credibility assessment, Relevant Documentation, Standard of proof, Well-founded fear
This judicial review case quashed a Refugee Appeals Tribunal decision on the basis that the Tribunal member incorrectly made credibility findings regarding the applicant’s claim without a fully reasoned consideration of the country of origin information and a flawed reliance on inconsistencies in an Iranian Court document.
Date: 03-06-2015
Country of Applicant: Nigeria
Keywords: Benefit of doubt, Burden of proof, Country of origin information, Credibility assessment, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Non-refoulement, Non-state actors/agents of persecution, Real risk, Subsequent application, Trafficking in human beings
Considering the general situation in the country and the circumstances specific to the Applicant, the ECtHR held that there were no serious and current grounds to believe that she would be at real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 upon her return to Nigeria.
Date: 26-05-2015
Country of Decision: Germany
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Benefit of doubt, Detention, Dublin Transfer, Effective access to procedures, Effective remedy (right to), First country of asylum, Health (right to), Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Integration measures, Personal circumstances of applicant, Reception conditions, Refugee Status
Where negative reports regarding the reception conditions and inhuman or degrading treatment in a first country of asylum indicate that an Applicant may not be safe in such a country, an Applicant’s request to remain in a Member State pending a decision on their right to remain must be given the benefit of doubt and outweigh the public’s interest in immediate enforcement of the ordered transfer.
Date: 07-01-2015
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Actor of persecution or serious harm, Benefit of doubt, Burden of proof, Effective access to procedures, Effective remedy (right to), Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Persecution (acts of), Political Opinion, Return
The case examines the risk to an Iranian national if expelled to Iran in light of his political activities against the country’s regime. The Court confirmed that such a return would give rise to a violation of Article 3 ECHR and whilst finding an Article 13 read in conjunction with Article 3 violation as admissible it raised no separate issue in the case.
Date: 18-11-2014
Country of Applicant: Iraq
Keywords: Benefit of doubt, Credibility assessment, Individual threat, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Internal protection, Membership of a particular social group, Standard of proof, Well-founded fear
The reasonable possibility of relocation to the Anbar governorate rendered a Sunni Muslim’s return to Iraq Article 3 compliant in spite of the personal risk he faced in Baghdad from a blood feud. His former membership of the Ba’ath party and military service was no longer regarded as a threat by the Court.
Date: 19-12-2013
Country of Decision: Greece
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Actor of persecution or serious harm, Benefit of doubt, Country of origin information, Credibility assessment, Death penalty / Execution, Discrimination, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Internal protection, Real risk, Religion, Serious harm, Sexual orientation, Well-founded fear
The Applicant was a homosexual male from Iran who had renounced Islam and was studying the catechism of the Roman Catholic doctrine. It was held that the Applicant had no well-founded (objective) fear of persecution on the grounds of changing his religious beliefs.
Regarding the risks associated with his sexual orientation, the fear that the Applicant expressed was deemed to be well-founded, and it was held that not externalising his sexual orientation to avoid danger would, in and of itself, constitute serious harm to his right to respect for his private life and his...
Date: 22-06-2012
Country of Decision: Austria
Country of Applicant: Russia
Keywords: Benefit of doubt, Dublin Transfer, Duty of applicant, Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports, Personal circumstances of applicant, Personal interview, Standard of proof, Vulnerable person
Traumatised people and those who have suffered otherwise psychologically and physically from flight behave differently when giving evidence compared with healthy people. This can mean that the full submissions relevant to asylum are not provided at the start of the proceedings or the traumatisation itself is not mentioned. These circumstances are to be taken into account during the ban on new evidence.
Date: 17-04-2007
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Benefit of doubt filterBenefit of doubt
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 7
- Country of origin information 5
- Credibility assessment 5
- Burden of proof 4
- Dublin Transfer 4
- Standard of proof 4
- Well-founded fear 4
- Effective access to procedures 3
- Effective remedy (right to) 3
- First country of asylum 3
- Real risk 3
- Reception conditions 3
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 2
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 2
- Internal protection 2
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 2
- Non-refoulement 2
- Personal circumstances of applicant 2
- Personal interview 2
- Return 2
- Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect) 2
- Safe third country 2
- Child Specific Considerations 1
- Death penalty / Execution 1
- Detention 1
- Discrimination 1
- Duty of applicant 1
- Health (right to) 1
- Humanitarian considerations 1
- Individual threat 1
- Integration measures 1
- Membership of a particular social group 1
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 1
- Persecution (acts of) 1
- Political Opinion 1
- Refugee Status 1
- Relevant Documentation 1
- Religion 1
- Serious harm 1
- Sexual orientation 1
- Subsequent application 1
- Trafficking in human beings 1
- Vulnerable person 1
Filter by country of applicant
- Iran 4
- Afghanistan 3
- Iraq 1
- Nigeria 1
- Russia 1
Filter by country of decision
- Germany 3
- Austria 1
- Czech Republic 1
- Greece 1
- Ireland 1
- United Kingdom 1
