EDAL case summaries
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Effective remedy (right to), Refugee Status, Subsidiary Protection
The CJEU ruled on whether an individual could appeal a decision which refused refugee status but granted subsidiary protection status, even if the rights and benefits afforded by each international protection status are identical in national law.
Date: 18-10-2018
Country of Decision: Denmark
Country of Applicant: Syria
Keywords: Actor of persecution or serious harm, Country of origin information, Internal armed conflict, Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Refugee Status, Relevant Facts, Subsidiary Protection
The complainant, an Ethnic Maktumin Stateless Kurd from Amuda, Al-Hasakah, Syria, was granted temporary protection under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (3).
On 31 August 2017 the complainant lodged a complaint claiming refugee status under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (1) or alternatively subsidiary protection under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (2).
The Board found that the complainant fulfilled the conditions for subsidiary protection under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (2) as he would risk participating in acts of war during the compulsory military service.
Date: 25-05-2018
Country of Decision: Austria
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: More favourable provisions, Protection, Refugee Status, Subsidiary Protection
The Regional Administrative Court of Upper Austria requests a preliminary ruling of the CJEU concerning the interpretation of Article 29 Directive 2011/95/EU in the context of social assistance for persons entitled to asylum with a temporary residence permit.
1) Must Article 29 Directive 2011/95/EU, entitling persons subject to international protection to the same level of social assistance in the Member State as nationals of this Member State, be interpreted as fulfilling the conditions for direct effect as set out in the CJEU’s jurisprudence?
2) Must Article 29 Directive...
Date: 18-12-2017
Country of Decision: France
Country of Applicant: Nigeria
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Dependant (Dependent person), Female genital mutilation, Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid, Membership of a particular social group, Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Personal circumstances of applicant, Protection, Refugee Status, Subsidiary Protection
In countries where there is a high prevalence of female genital mutilation (FGM), as in Nigeria, non-excised persons can be considered as having a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of membership of a particular social group within the meaning of Article 1A(2) of 1951 Refugee Convention. Refugee status can be granted where there is a considerable risk of excision and insufficient protection against this threat.
Date: 23-10-2017
Country of Decision: Poland
Country of Applicant: Russia (Chechnya)
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Best interest of the child, Child Specific Considerations, Individual threat, Internal protection, Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports, Persecution (acts of), Procedural guarantees, Refugee Status, Relevant Documentation, Subsidiary Protection
Following the appeal of the Children’s Rights Ombudsman, the Supreme Administrative Court set aside the order of the Regional Administrative Court, in relation to a challenge to the decision of the Polish Refugee Board, and set aside the aforementioned decision to refuse tolerated stay, dismissing the appeal in all other respects.
The court justified its decision with reference to the procedural errors of the Polish Refugee Board, which included failing to gather evidence in an appropriate manner and inappropriately establishing the facts relating to the Applicant’s children....
Date: 22-06-2017
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: Austria
Country of Applicant: Ukraine
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Country of origin information, Individual assessment, Internal protection, Obligation to give reasons, Persecution (acts of), Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Personal circumstances of applicant, Political Opinion, Refugee Status, Relevant Facts, Subsidiary Protection
In the course of an asylum procedure, the statements of the asylum seeker have to be assessed integrally. This includes, inter alia, an analysis of (up-to-date) country reports. However, such analysis is not carried out in a sufficient manner where there are only superficial references to the country of origin information. Rather, it is required that the information contained is actually taken into consideration when taking the decision, applied to the specific circumstances of each case and compared to the information provided by the asylum seeker(s).
... Date: 17-11-2016
Country of Decision: Germany
Country of Applicant: Syria
Keywords: Country of origin information, Duty of applicant, Political Opinion, Refugee Status, Religion, Subsidiary Protection, Torture
When deciding whether refugee status should be available , one must not only consider any pre-persecution but also post-flight circumstances. Judged on a forward looking basis of persecution of political enemies within Syrian territory, upon return to Syria there continues to be a danger of individual persecution including human rights violations by reason of belonging to a certain group.
Date: 07-10-2016
Country of Decision: Germany
Country of Applicant: Russia (Chechnya)
Keywords: First country of asylum, Inadmissible application, Refugee Status, Revocation of protection status, Subsidiary Protection
A renewed application for asylum in a second country is admissible if the nature of international protection applied for differs from the protection already granted. Deportation to the country of the first application or the country of origin is not to be taken into account in this situation.
Date: 11-09-2016
Country of Decision: Germany
Country of Applicant: Somalia
Keywords: Inadmissible application, Refugee Status, Relevant Facts, Subsidiary Protection
An application for asylum filed prior to 20 July 2015 cannot be considered inadmissible because subsidiary protection has already been granted by another Member State (if the protection applied for is more favourable than the existing protection). The assessment of the admissibility of an application for asylum filed prior to 20 July 2015 is subject to the laws, regulations and administrative provisions adopted pursuant to the now superseded Asylum Procedures Directive (Directive 2005/85/EU) which provided for inadmissibility of an application for asylum if refugee status had already been...
Date: 04-08-2016
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Refugee Status filterRefugee Status
- (-) Remove Subsidiary Protection filterSubsidiary Protection
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 11
- Protection 9
- Well-founded fear 9
- Credibility assessment 8
- Country of origin information 7
- Real risk 7
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 6
- Membership of a particular social group 6
- Procedural guarantees 6
- Individual assessment 5
- Internal protection 5
- Obligation to give reasons 5
- Political Opinion 5
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 4
- Child Specific Considerations 4
- Inadmissible application 4
- Persecution (acts of) 4
- Personal circumstances of applicant 4
- Standard of proof 4
- Best interest of the child 3
- Effective remedy (right to) 3
- Exclusion from protection 3
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 3
- Non-refoulement 3
- Previous persecution 3
- Race 3
- Reception conditions 3
- Relevant Documentation 3
- Relevant Facts 3
- Torture 3
- Accommodation centre 2
- Burden of proof 2
- Country of origin 2
- Detention 2
- Dublin Transfer 2
- Effective access to procedures 2
- Gender Based Persecution 2
- Humanitarian considerations 2
- Individual threat 2
- Internal armed conflict 2
- Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid 2
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 2
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 2
- Refugee sur place 2
- Religion 2
- Return 2
- Revocation of protection status 2
- Serious non-political crime 2
- Sexual orientation 2
- Subsequent application 2
- Unaccompanied minor 2
- Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN 1
- Armed conflict 1
- Benefit of doubt 1
- Crime against humanity 1
- Dependant (Dependent person) 1
- Duty of applicant 1
- Female genital mutilation 1
- Final decision 1
- First country of asylum 1
- Freedom of movement (right to) 1
- Health (right to) 1
- Integration measures 1
- International armed conflict 1
- Material reception conditions 1
- More favourable provisions 1
- Personal interview 1
- Responsibility for examining application 1
- Safe country of origin 1
- Serious harm 1
- Stateless person 1
- Terrorism 1
- War crimes 1
Filter by country of applicant
- Afghanistan 7
- Somalia 6
- Syria 5
- Turkey 3
- Russia 2
- Russia (Chechnya) 2
- Cameroon 1
- Gambia 1
- India 1
- Iraq 1
- Nigeria 1
- Pakistan 1
- Palestinian Territory 1
- South Africa 1
- Sri Lanka 1
- Uganda 1
- Ukraine 1
