EDAL case summaries
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....
The Court found that there had been a violation of Article 3 in relation to detention conditions at Tychero. There was no violation of Article 5(1) insofar as the detention was not arbitrary and was in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law, but there was a violation of Article 5(4) in relation to the ineffectiveness of the judicial review of detention conditions. Further, there was a violation of Article 13 read in conjunction with Article 3, because the Greek authorities had deported the Applicant to Turkey, without verifying whether his asylum claim was still...
This Case examines the refusal to grant refugee status to a Nepalese national. The Tribunal failed to provide clear, cogent reasoning for the decision. Documentation and explanations provided by the Applicant were not included in the decision. Unreasonable assumptions were made by the Tribunal including: as the Applicant’s wife, children and brother were safely residing in the country of origin, this inferred that the Applicant could do the same; since the applicant spent 6 years living safely in India, he could continue to live there safely. The High Court criticised the procedural...
The applicant challenged by way of judicial review the decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal (hereinafter RAT) (adverse credibility findings) on the grounds that it failed to have reasonable regard to the documents submitted. The Court held that the Tribunal failed to provide reasons rejecting a medico-legal report and further held that the Tribunal’s analysis of documentary evidence supportive of ethnicity submitted was wrong in fact. The Court quashed the decision of the Tribunal.
When verifying an asylum seeker’s claimed sexual orientation, Member States’ freedom of action is constrained by the Charter of Fundamental Rights.
The evaluation of an asylum application should not be based on stereotyped notions and should include an individualised assessment taking into account the applicant’s personal circumstances, vulnerability in particular.
Not declaring homosexuality at the outset to the relevant authorities can not result in a conclusion that the individual’s declaration lacks credibility.
The case concerns the interpretation of Directive 2004/83 and clarifies that the Irish legislation requiring seekers of international protection to follow two separate procedural stages: application for refugee status, and in case of refusal, application for subsidiary protection, is not contrary to EU law if the two applications can be introduced at the same time and if the application for subsidiary protection is considered within a reasonable period of time.
The right to good administration includes the right of any person to have his or her affairs handled impartially and within...
A stateless Palestinian woman from Syria who was registered with the UNRWA but who was no longer receiving support from the organisation was granted refugee status by the Migration Court of Appeal, and the case was returned to the Swedish Migration Board for re-examination of the period of validity of the residence permit.
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...
The Court granted permission to the Applicants to seek judicial review of the negative decision made in a written appeal (rather than an oral appeal) in an application for refugee status made by a South African one-parent family. The decision to allow a written appeal was based on the status of South Africa as a ‘safe country,’ and the appeal decision was based on personal credibility and the absence of a nexus to Convention grounds. The Applicants failed in their argument that the absence of an oral hearing may render the appeal decision unlawful by reference to the right to an effective...
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Procedural guarantees filterProcedural guarantees
- (-) Remove Refugee Status filterRefugee Status
- Effective remedy (right to) 9
- Credibility assessment 8
- Protection 7
- Real risk 7
- Well-founded fear 7
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 6
- Membership of a particular social group 6
- Obligation to give reasons 6
- Subsidiary Protection 6
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 4
- Detention 4
- Effective access to procedures 4
- Non-refoulement 4
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 4
- Return 4
- Best interest of the child 3
- Child Specific Considerations 3
- Country of origin information 3
- Individual assessment 3
- Internal protection 3
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 3
- Personal interview 3
- Relevant Documentation 3
- Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect) 3
- Standard of proof 3
- Torture 3
- Burden of proof 2
- Duty of applicant 2
- Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid 2
- Persecution (acts of) 2
- Race 2
- Reception conditions 2
- Relevant Facts 2
- Revocation of protection status 2
- Safe country of origin 2
- Subsequent application 2
- Unaccompanied minor 2
- Accelerated procedure 1
- Access to the labour market 1
- Accommodation centre 1
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 1
- Delay 1
- Final decision 1
- Gender Based Persecution 1
- Individual threat 1
- International armed conflict 1
- Manifestly unfounded application 1
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 1
- Personal circumstances of applicant 1
- Previous persecution 1
- Residence document 1
- Safe third country 1
- Sexual orientation 1
- Withdrawal of protection application 1
Filter by country of applicant
- Afghanistan 3
- Turkey 3
- South Africa 2
- Syria 2
- Eritrea 1
- Ethiopia 1
- India 1
- Iran 1
- Jordan 1
- Nepal 1
- Pakistan 1
- Palestinian Territory 1
- Russia (Chechnya) 1
- Somalia 1
- Sri Lanka 1
- Sudan 1
- United Kingdom 1