EDAL case summaries
Country of Decision: Greece
Country of Applicant: Bangladesh
Keywords: Refugee Status, Residence document, Vulnerable person
The recognition of gender identity is a matter of respect towards the individual’s personality, protected under Greek and international law and applicable by analogy to refugees. Refugees must be able to request assistance from the authorities of the host-country, as refugeehood entails severed ties with the country of origin making it impossible for recognised refugees to request official actions from their governments.
Date: 31-12-2018
Country of Decision: France
Country of Applicant: Nigeria
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Dublin Transfer, Effective remedy (right to), Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Reception conditions, Responsibility for examining application, Trafficking in human beings, Vulnerable person
As a result of a transfer order to Italian authorities joined with house arrest, the applicant lodged an appeal. She argued she would be at risk of being exposed to inhuman and degrading treatments, as well as to systemic lapses of the Italian asylum system. In this case, the administrative tribunal granted annulment of those orders issued by the prefect of la Haute-Garonne in the light of the current Italian asylum conditions and the reasons motivating the applicant to reach France after having stayed in Italy.
Date: 09-11-2018
Country of Applicant: Congo (DRC)
Keywords: Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Material reception conditions, Refugee sur place, Vulnerable person
The Court examines the individuals’ circumstances and finds that the appointment with the French authorities to register and assess their asylum cases within a three-month period, coupled with the possibility for the applicants to stay in a foster home at night, access education, healthcare and meals provided by organisations during the day, cannot amount to treatment prohibited under the Convention.
Date: 24-08-2018
Country of Decision: Denmark
Country of Applicant: Eritrea
Keywords: Child Specific Considerations, First country of asylum, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Vulnerable person
The complainant, an Eritrean citizen and a single woman with a one-and-a-half-year-old child, filed a complaint against the decision of the Danish Immigration Service to reject her application in accordance with the Danish Aliens Act art. 29 (b) as the Greek authorities had granted her refugee status in Greece, valid until 25 November 2017. The complainant referred to the UNHCR EXCOM-conclusion no. 58/1989.
The Board did not find that the general social and economic conditions for refugees with a residence permit in Greece – although difficult – in itself could lead to the...
Date: 17-04-2018
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Vulnerable person
The exhaustion of domestic remedies is a prerequisite for the admissibility of applications lodged with the ECtHR under Article 35 ECHR. Removal of individuals suffering from severe medical problems may not be considered inhumane in the meaning of Article 3 ECHR, when suitable treatment exists in the country of origin.
Date: 03-04-2018
Country of Decision: France
Country of Applicant: Sudan
Keywords: Effective access to procedures, Effective remedy (right to), Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect), Unaccompanied minor, Vulnerable person
The refusal of an entry decision given to an unaccompanied child at the Franco-Italian border is manifestly unlawful and constitutes a severe breach of the applicant’s interest.
Date: 23-02-2018
Country of Decision: United Kingdom
Country of Applicant: Eritrea
Keywords: Accelerated procedure, Dublin Transfer, Effective access to procedures, Family member, Family unity (right to), Unaccompanied minor, Vulnerable person
The imposition of a "one-off" expedited procedure in France for unaccompanied children wishing to reunite with their family in the UK fell within the framework of the Dublin Regulation. The failure by the UK Secretary of State to give full effect to the Dublin Regulation (most notably Article 17) and the Commission’s Implementing Regulation was unlawful and as a consequence the applicant was deprived of a series of procedural safeguards and protection.
In addition the applicant’s procedural rights have been violated by virtue of the procedural deficiencies and shortcomings...
Date: 05-06-2017
Country of Applicant: Egypt, Syria
Keywords: Accommodation centre, Dublin Transfer, Health (right to), Individual assessment, Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports, Reception conditions, Request that charge be taken, Vulnerable person
Even where there are no substantial grounds for believing that there are systemic flaws in the Member State responsible, a Dublin transfer can only be carried out in conditions which exclude the possibility that that transfer might result in a real and proven risk of the person concerned suffering inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 4 CFR EU.
If there is a real and proven risk that the state of health of an applicant who suffers from a serious mental or physical illness would significantly and permanently deteriorate,...
Date: 16-02-2017
Country of Decision: France
Country of Applicant: Comoros
Keywords: Best interest of the child, Effective access to procedures, Personal interview, Procedural guarantees, Vulnerable person
Asserting a violation of the procedural rules by the French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (‘OFPRA’) when a child’s legal representative or any ad hoc administrator was absent from a hearing, the National Court of Asylum (‘CNDA’) annulled OFPRA’s decision and sent the case back to it to be decided again under the correct circumstances.
The CNDA sets out the limits to the principle of family unity in such as it is not applicable to the child of a refugee, the refugee having obtained that status only through application of the said principle following her...
Date: 05-10-2016
Country of Decision: United Kingdom
Country of Applicant: Albania
Keywords: Best interest of the child, Child Specific Considerations, Country of origin information, Credibility assessment, Internal protection, Manifestly unfounded application, Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports, Membership of a particular social group, Non-state actors/agents of persecution, Personal circumstances of applicant, Protection, Real risk, Refugee Status, Safe country of origin, Vulnerable person, Well-founded fear
This case dealt with the issue of whether the Secretary of State’s certification of the asylum claims of the two independent applicants as “clearly unfounded” was flawed on public law grounds, and the important difference between a decision on refugee status itself and a decision on a claim being “clearly unfounded”.
Date: 23-06-2016
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Vulnerable person filterVulnerable person
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 9
- Reception conditions 5
- Best interest of the child 4
- Dublin Transfer 4
- Effective access to procedures 4
- Effective remedy (right to) 4
- Material reception conditions 4
- Burden of proof 3
- Child Specific Considerations 3
- Family unity (right to) 3
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 3
- Personal circumstances of applicant 3
- Responsibility for examining application 3
- Unaccompanied minor 3
- Accommodation centre 2
- Country of origin information 2
- Credibility assessment 2
- Detention 2
- Family member 2
- Individual assessment 2
- Internal protection 2
- Procedural guarantees 2
- Real risk 2
- Refugee Status 2
- Request that charge be taken 2
- Return 2
- Torture 2
- Accelerated procedure 1
- Access to the labour market 1
- Armed conflict 1
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 1
- Family reunification 1
- First country of asylum 1
- Health (right to) 1
- Manifestly unfounded application 1
- Membership of a particular social group 1
- Non-refoulement 1
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 1
- Personal interview 1
- Political Opinion 1
- Previous persecution 1
- Protection 1
- Refugee sur place 1
- Religion 1
- Residence document 1
- Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect) 1
- Safe country of origin 1
- Safe third country 1
- Serious harm 1
- Standard of proof 1
- Subsidiary Protection 1
- Trafficking in human beings 1
- Well-founded fear 1
Filter by country of applicant
- Afghanistan 3
- Egypt 2
- Eritrea 2
- Syria 2
- Albania 1
- Bangladesh 1
- Colombia 1
- Comoros 1
- Congo (DRC) 1
- Iran 1
- Nigeria 1
- Sudan 1
- Turkey 1
