EDAL case summaries
The French National Court on Asylum has made an error of law by refusing to grant at the very least subsidiary protection to the applicant following his new request to re-examine his situation, despite a condemnation from the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) for the violation of Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
Following the careful examination of International, European and domestic law, the Court concluded that the grant of refugee status supersedes any order made by a Family Court (regarding the return of the child to Pakistan), because it is the Secretary of State for the Home Department that is the entrusted public authority to deal with asylum matters. However, were the Family Court to discover new facts, the relevant public authority would be responsible, in principle, under the tenets of UK Administrative Law to review their decision.
Deprivation of liberty as allowed by art. 5.1(f) of the Convention not only has to be with a view to deportation, but it also has to be in compliance with national law, and free from arbitrariness.
The submission of an asylum application does not as such imply that detention is no longer with a view to deportation.
The appellant sought to have the decision of the Secretary General of the Ministry of Public Order annulled, under which her previous application for her and her son to be recognised as refugees had been rejected. The Hellenic Council of State rejected the current appeal, due to the fact that the appellant had invoked financial reasons for leaving Syria and as such, had no legal basis to be recognised as a refugee.
The Court examined the complaints of a Somali national concerning her detention conditions in Malta (Article 3), which deteriorated her mental health and resulted in inhuman and degrading treatment. She further alleged that her detention was in breach of Article 5 § 1, 2 and 4 (Right to liberty and security).
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 case concerns a recognised as a refugee in the United Kingdom, who was to be deported in the interests of national security to Jordan. The UK Government obtained assurances from Jordan that he would not be subjected to ill-treatment and would be tried fairly by the Jordanian State Security Court. However the applicant alleged that, if deported to Jordan, he would be at real risk of ill-treatment and an unfair trial.
The case concerns the expulsion of a refugee on the grounds of national security, under an order that did not set out reasons and resulted in violations of Art. 8 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 7 of the ECHR.
The European Court of Human Rights found a violation of Article 5 para 1 (f), 4 and 5 with regards to some of the eleven applicants in this case, who were detained as suspected terrorists by UK authorities.
The case concerns access to a remedy with suspensive effect by an asylum seeker, who claimed asylum at the French border, against a potential removal from France to a country where there is real reason to believe he would face the risk of being subjected to ill-treatment contrary to Article 3 of the ECHR.
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Refugee Status filterRefugee Status
- (-) Remove Return filterReturn
- Effective remedy (right to) 6
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 5
- Country of origin 4
- Detention 4
- Real risk 4
- Effective access to procedures 3
- Procedural guarantees 3
- Subsidiary Protection 3
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 2
- Final decision 2
- Persecution (acts of) 2
- Protection 2
- Safe country of origin 2
- Well-founded fear 2
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 1
- Best interest of the child 1
- Cessation of protection 1
- Child Specific Considerations 1
- Country of former habitual residence 1
- Country of origin information 1
- Credibility assessment 1
- Dependant (Dependent person) 1
- Dublin Transfer 1
- Exclusion from protection 1
- Family member 1
- Family reunification 1
- Family unity (right to) 1
- First country of asylum 1
- Individual assessment 1
- Individual threat 1
- Manifestly unfounded application 1
- Material reception conditions 1
- Non-refoulement 1
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 1
- Personal circumstances of applicant 1
- Personal interview 1
- Relevant Facts 1
- Terrorism 1
- Torture 1
Filter by country of applicant
- Afghanistan 2
- Jordan 2
- Somalia 2
- Algeria 1
- Congo (Republic of) 1
- Eritrea 1
- France 1
- India 1
- Morocco 1
- Pakistan 1
- Palestinian Territory 1
- Syria 1
- Tunisia 1
- Turkey 1
- United Kingdom 1
Filter by country of decision
- Austria 1
- France 1
- Greece 1
- United Kingdom 1