You are here
Home › Refugee Status ›EDAL case summaries
Analysing the legality of the refusal to grant child benefit payments to parents who are not habitually resident within the State for the benefit of their children.
This case primarily dealt with the lawfulness of a prolonged period of detention in the context of whether there was a reasonable prospect of deportation and also of evidence of both current mental illness and previous torture and trafficking.
This case dealt with the extent to which in the case of a child the prospect of discrimination could amount to a real risk of persecution sufficient to found a successful asylum claim in a situation where a comparably placed adult would not be at such a risk.
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).
...The French National Asylum Court (CNDA) must do a complete assessment of facts and circumstances in deciding whether an applicant should be granted refugee status, or failing that, subsidiary protection. In doing so, it must take into account all the documentation provided by the Applicant in support of the application. In this case, the Applicant’s medical evidence documentation and the evidence relating to the potential risks she is likely to face if she returns to her country (fear of persecution due to imputed political opinions) should have been taken into account.
The CNDA did...
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.
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.
A Syrian asylum-seeker successfully challenges a negative asylum decision before the Swiss Federal Administrative Court because of violations of his right to be heard.
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...
The applicant requested international protection in Spain on 3rd November 2014, having been assaulted in his country of origin because of his sexual orientation. His partner died as a result of the assault. On the 26th October 2015, the Trial Chamber denied his request, stating that the allegations put forward by the applicant were “improbable or insufficient.”
On 18th July 2016, the applicant appealed this decision on two different grounds of appeal. First, on the grounds of an error when applying the relevant procedures for granting and withdrawing...
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Refugee Status filterRefugee Status
- Well-founded fear 53
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 48
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 46
- Real risk 44
- Detention 37
- Effective remedy (right to) 37
- Protection 37
- Subsidiary Protection 36
- Persecution (acts of) 35
- Country of origin information 34
- Membership of a particular social group 33
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 29
- Credibility assessment 29
- Political Opinion 26
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 22
- Personal circumstances of applicant 22
- Procedural guarantees 22
- Individual assessment 20
- Non-refoulement 19
- Effective access to procedures 16
- Internal protection 16
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 16
- Torture 16
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 15
- Relevant Documentation 15
- Return 15
- Child Specific Considerations 14
- Discrimination 14
- Obligation to give reasons 14
- Relevant Facts 14
- Sexual orientation 14
- Country of origin 13
- Family unity (right to) 13
- Material reception conditions 13
- Reception conditions 13
- Exclusion from protection 11
- Gender Based Persecution 11
- Best interest of the child 10
- Family member 10
- Previous persecution 10
- Religion 10
- Safe country of origin 10
- Unaccompanied minor 10
- Dublin Transfer 9
- Personal interview 9
- Race 9
- Subsequent application 9
- Actors of protection 8
- Burden of proof 8
- Dependant (Dependent person) 8
- Inadmissible application 8
- Individual threat 8
- Standard of proof 8
- Duty of applicant 7
- Family reunification 7
- Revocation of protection status 7
- Terrorism 7
- Female genital mutilation 6
- Final decision 6
- First country of asylum 6
- Internal armed conflict 6
- Refugee sur place 6
- Safe third country 6
- Serious harm 6
- Stateless person 6
- Access to the labour market 5
- Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN 5
- Health (right to) 5
- Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid 5
- Manifestly unfounded application 5
- Request to take back 5
- Responsibility for examining application 5
- Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect) 5
- Accelerated procedure 4
- Accommodation centre 4
- Armed conflict 4
- Humanitarian considerations 4
- Serious non-political crime 4
- Benefit of doubt 3
- Crime against humanity 3
- Delay 3
- International armed conflict 3
- Nationality 3
- Request that charge be taken 3
- Residence document 3
- Vulnerable person 3
- War crimes 3
- Country of former habitual residence 2
- Freedom of movement (right to) 2
- Integration measures 2
- Trafficking in human beings 2
- Visa 2
- Cessation of protection 1
- Circumstances ceased to exist 1
- Death penalty / Execution 1
- Indirect refoulement 1
- Indiscriminate violence 1
- More favourable provisions 1
- Sponsor 1
- Withdrawal of protection application 1
Filter by date
Filter by country of applicant
- Afghanistan 22
- Syria 22
- Turkey 17
- Russia 13
- Somalia 13
- Iran 9
- Nigeria 9
- Iraq 6
- Lebanon 6
- Pakistan 6
- Sudan 6
- Congo (DRC) 5
- Palestinian Territory 5
- Sri Lanka 5
- Bangladesh 4
- Ethiopia 4
- Russia (Chechnya) 4
- Sierra Leone 4
- Albania 3
- Algeria 3
- Cameroon 3
- Egypt 3
- Eritrea 3
- India 3
- Azerbaijan 2
- China 2
- Gambia 2
- Jordan 2
- Kyrgyzstan 2
- Morocco 2
- Rwanda 2
- Senegal 2
- South Africa 2
- Tunisia 2
- Uganda 2
- United Kingdom 2
- Unknown 2
- Angola 1
- Czech Republic 1
- France 1
- Georgia 1
- Ghana 1
- Guinea-Bissau 1
- Ivory Coast 1
- Kazakhstan 1
- Kuwait 1
- Liberia 1
- Mongolia 1
- Nepal 1
- Slovakia 1
- Tanzania 1
- Togo 1
- Ukraine 1
Filter by country of decision
- Greece 23
- Germany 16
- France 15
- United Kingdom 14
- Ireland 13
- Poland 11
- Sweden 10
- Austria 9
- Denmark 9
- Hungary 8
- Italy 6
- Spain 2
- Switzerland 2
- Czech Republic 1
- Slovenia 1