EDAL case summaries
Country of Decision: France
Country of Applicant: Sri Lanka
Keywords: Refugee Status, Subsequent application
The Council of State (the “Council”) overturned an order of the National Court of Asylum (the “NCA”) rejecting a request for annulment of a decision of the French Office for the Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (the “OFPRA”) rejecting the Applicant’s request for refugee status or subsidiary protection. The reasoning for the rejection by the NCA was that no new elements had been presented since the previous decision that had been given.
The Council considered that the disclosure by the prefecture to the Sri Lankan Embassy...
Date: 10-02-2016
Country of Applicant: Russia
Keywords: Actor of persecution or serious harm, Burden of proof, Credibility assessment, Detention, Duty of applicant, Effective access to procedures, Effective remedy (right to), Individual threat, Non-state actors/agents of persecution, Persecution (acts of), Real risk, Refugee Status, Relevant Documentation, Relevant Facts, Standard of proof, Subsequent application, Well-founded fear
The Court found a violation of Article 3 in relation to a subsequent application for asylum, which had been rejected on the basis that it contained no new elements indicating that the Applicants ran a real risk of being subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment on deportation to Russia. Because new information had in fact been provided, the national authorities were under an obligation to thoroughly review the information in order to assure themselves that the Applicants’ rights under Article 3 would be safeguarded.
Date: 19-01-2016
Country of Decision: Poland
Country of Applicant: Russia
Keywords: Effective access to procedures, Refugee Status, Subsequent application, Subsidiary Protection
The Court ruled that when deciding whether the subsequent application is admissible, new facts regarding the individual situation of the applicant or her situation in the country of origin as well as change in the situation of the country of origin alone are significant. When examining whether the grounds of the first and the subsequent application are the same, the essence of the facts is important, not the manner in which they are presented.
With regard to the applicant’s argument that in the present case the legal grounds for granting subsidiary protection were not examined, the...
Date: 07-09-2015
Country of Applicant: Syria
Keywords: Delay, Detention, Effective remedy (right to), Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid, Procedural guarantees, Refugee Status, Return, Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect), Subsequent application
The case concerns a Syrian Kurd’s detention by Cypriot authorities and his intended deportation to Syria after an early morning police operation on 11 June 2010 removing him and other Kurds from Syria from an encampment outside government buildings in Nicosia in protest against the Cypriot Government’s asylum policy.
The Court found a violation of Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) of the European Convention on Human Rights taken together with Articles 2 (right to life) and 3 (prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment) due to the lack of an effective remedy with...
Date: 23-07-2013
Country of Decision: Poland
Country of Applicant: Russia
Keywords: Individual assessment, Personal circumstances of applicant, Burden of proof, Refugee Status, Refugee sur place, Membership of a particular social group, Subsequent application
The third action in a row brought by a foreign woman for refugee status ended in the issue of a judgment dismissing the case as it was found that the basis for the application was the same as in the previous cases and the application was therefore inadmissible. The Court overturned the negative decision by the Polish Council for Refugees, as the new application by the foreign woman stated that she had divorced her then husband and had been in a relationship for a year with a Polish citizen, which might cause persecution on religious grounds were she to return to her country of origin.
Date: 13-06-2012
Country of Decision: France
Country of Applicant: Turkey
Keywords: Persecution (acts of), Procedural guarantees, Refugee Status, Subsequent application
Where national authorities responsible for examining asylum applications breach the duty of confidentiality, this can of itself create conditions exposing an asylum seeker to persecution within the meaning of the 1951 Refugee Convention.
Date: 04-05-2012
Country of Decision: Greece
Country of Applicant: Turkey
Keywords: Exclusion from protection, Non-refoulement, Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Refugee Status, Relevant Documentation, Stateless person, Subsequent application, Subsidiary Protection, Well-founded fear
The General Secretary of the Ministry of Public Order, having had an application for asylum referred back to it, considered whether the submitted evidence was “new and crucial”. If so, an ab initio examination of the application would be ordered. Failure to give notification of an act does not affect its validity, but only the start of the deadline for submitting an application for its annulment. The copy of the Turkish Government Gazette which promulgated the decision regarding withdrawal of the Applicant's nationality, was new and crucial evidence. There was no justification...
Date: 25-10-2011
Country of Decision: Poland
Country of Applicant: Russia
Keywords: Dublin Transfer, Family member, Family reunification, Family unity (right to), Inadmissible application, Refugee Status, Request that charge be taken, Subsequent application
During the refugee status proceedings, the administrative authorities should clarify on what grounds a foreign husband has received protection in another country. These circumstances should be assessed consistently in two countries.
There are no objective reasons why the respective positions of two individuals should be viewed differently merely because they have applied for refugee status in two different democratic countries that respect human rights.
Date: 01-09-2011
Country of Decision: Greece
Country of Applicant: Unknown
Keywords: Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports, Refugee Status, Relevant Documentation, Subsequent application, Torture
The petition for an ab initio examination of the asylum application was rejected by the General Secretary of the Ministry of Public Order (decision being appealed in this case) because the evidence submitted was not deemed to be new and crucial. That ruling in the contested decision was flawed because the General Secretary did not have the authority to decide whether the Applicant had refugee status deeming the evidence submitted (a medical report which linked clinical findings to torture) to not be crucial for granting asylum. Instead, he should have ordered an ab initio...
Date: 05-05-2009
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Refugee Status filterRefugee Status
- (-) Remove Subsequent application filterSubsequent application
- Relevant Documentation 3
- Burden of proof 2
- Detention 2
- Effective access to procedures 2
- Effective remedy (right to) 2
- Persecution (acts of) 2
- Procedural guarantees 2
- Subsidiary Protection 2
- Well-founded fear 2
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 1
- Credibility assessment 1
- Delay 1
- Dublin Transfer 1
- Duty of applicant 1
- Exclusion from protection 1
- Family member 1
- Family reunification 1
- Family unity (right to) 1
- Inadmissible application 1
- Individual assessment 1
- Individual threat 1
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 1
- Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid 1
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 1
- Membership of a particular social group 1
- Non-refoulement 1
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 1
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 1
- Personal circumstances of applicant 1
- Real risk 1
- Refugee sur place 1
- Relevant Facts 1
- Request that charge be taken 1
- Return 1
- Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect) 1
- Standard of proof 1
- Stateless person 1
- Torture 1
