EDAL case summaries
An application for international protection lodged by an Afghan who illegally entered Austria was rejected. The Court found that the applicant had no well-founded fear of persecution in his country of origin nor was he to be granted the subsidiary protection status.
The court ordered the Office of Immigration and Nationality to conduct new proceedings. The mere fact that national security risk factors arise vis-à-vis a person is not sufficient reason to exclude them from refugee or subsidiary protection status.
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...
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Non-refoulement filterNon-refoulement
- (-) Remove Refugee Status filterRefugee Status
- (-) Remove Subsidiary Protection filterSubsidiary Protection
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 2
- Well-founded fear 2
- Country of origin 1
- Credibility assessment 1
- Exclusion from protection 1
- Final decision 1
- Individual threat 1
- Obligation to give reasons 1
- Persecution (acts of) 1
- Personal circumstances of applicant 1
- Protection 1
- Real risk 1
- Relevant Documentation 1
- Return 1
- Stateless person 1
- Subsequent application 1
- Terrorism 1
Filter by country of applicant
- Turkey 2
- Afghanistan 1