EDAL case summaries
Country of Decision: Switzerland
Country of Applicant: Nigeria
Keywords: Country of origin information, Credibility assessment, Gender Based Persecution, Personal circumstances of applicant, Personal interview, Trafficking in human beings
In cases of reasonable suspicion that a person applying for asylum was a victim of human trafficking, the Swiss State Secretary for Migration is obliged to clarify the facts thoroughly on its own initiative.
Date: 18-07-2016
Country of Applicant: Nigeria
Keywords: Benefit of doubt, Burden of proof, Country of origin information, Credibility assessment, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Non-refoulement, Non-state actors/agents of persecution, Real risk, Subsequent application, Trafficking in human beings
Considering the general situation in the country and the circumstances specific to the Applicant, the ECtHR held that there were no serious and current grounds to believe that she would be at real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 upon her return to Nigeria.
Date: 26-05-2015
Country of Decision: Italy
Country of Applicant: Nigeria
Keywords: Access to the labour market, Armed conflict, Burden of proof, Country of origin information, Credibility assessment, Duty of applicant, Indiscriminate violence, Obligation/Duty to cooperate, Persecution (acts of), Personal circumstances of applicant
The applicant’ s description of a situation which gives rise to a risk to his life or physical integrity, deriving from gender-based violence, social or religious group violence, family/domestic violence, which is accepted, tolerated or not tackled by the State, imposes an ex proprio motu further investigation upon the Judiciary. The latter entails an investigation into the control of violence described by the applicant in terms of whether it is widespread, whether there is impunity for the acts as well as the State’s response
Date: 02-12-2014
Country of Decision: Austria
Country of Applicant: Nigeria
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Country of origin information, Final decision, Individual assessment, Membership of a particular social group, Obligation to give reasons, Sexual orientation, Subsequent application
This case involved a violation of the right to equal treatment of foreigners as a result of a rejection of the application for international protection and expulsion of the homosexual Applicant to Nigeria because of a failure by the decision-maker to make its own country determinations and to thoroughly examine the situation of homosexuals in Nigeria.
Date: 16-09-2013
Country of Decision: United Kingdom
Country of Applicant: Nigeria
Keywords: Country of origin information, Procedural guarantees, Trafficking in human beings
This case concerned the manner in which Country Guidance case law is reported in the UK, particularly with reference to the reporting of the headnote and, as in this case, the inversion of the guidance. The factual consideration of this case considered whether there was sufficient protection for victims of human trafficking.
Date: 22-02-2011
Country of Decision: Italy
Country of Applicant: Nigeria
Keywords: Burden of proof, Country of origin information
The existence of a risk of persecution in the country of origin should be assessed on the basis of information concerning the country of origin rather than on the basis of the credibility of the asylum seeker.
Date: 01-12-2010
Country of Decision: Germany
Country of Applicant: Nigeria
Keywords: Gender Based Persecution, Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Membership of a particular social group, Political Opinion, Subsidiary Protection, Assessment of facts and circumstances, Country of origin information, Personal circumstances of applicant
- In principle, a threat of female genital mutilation (FGM) has to be considered as political persecution according to Section 60 (1) Residence Act.
- In Nigeria, FGM is still widespread in all known forms. For the Edo ethnic group, it is usually performed between seven and fourteen days after birth.
- The number of circumcisions performed (among the Edo ethnic group) during puberty has decreased significantly in recent years and circumcisions in adulthood are no longer performed, or they are only carried out in a small number of cases.
In the present case the...
Date: 10-05-2010
Country of Decision: Germany
Country of Applicant: Nigeria
Keywords: Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Membership of a particular social group, Subsidiary Protection, Assessment of facts and circumstances, Country of origin information, Gender Based Persecution, Personal circumstances of applicant
A single woman from Nigeria (Urhobo) was eligible for protection from deportation under Section 60 (7) sentence (1) of the Residence Act due to a threat of female genital mutilation (FGM) and forced marriage. The economic and social situation in Nigeria is difficult and tense even for the vast majority of the population. The situation is much worse for single women as women in Nigeria are exposed to multiple discrimination. To a large extent they are under legal incapacity, so that in practice they are only in a position to protect their own interests if they are supported by their family...
Date: 15-03-2010
Country of Decision: Ireland
Country of Applicant: Nigeria
Keywords: Country of origin information, Actor of persecution or serious harm, Actors of protection, Internal protection, Non-state actors/agents of persecution, Procedural guarantees
This case concerned the refusal of a Refugee appeal on the basis that Sate protection was available and/or that the applicant could relocate within Nigeria and avoid persecution. In support of the finding that State was available; the Tribunal Member relied upon part of a UK Home Office Operational Guidance Note (OGN) on Nigeria that had not been provided to the applicant. The Court found that the applicant not afforded fair procedures. She had no opportunity to comment upon the information in the OGN. The Court also found that the issue of whether or not State protection is available...
Date: 09-12-2009
Country of Decision: Ireland
Country of Applicant: Nigeria
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Country of origin information, Credibility assessment, Subsidiary Protection, Effective remedy (right to)
The applicant complained that the refusal to recommend refugee status at first instance contained errors such that on appeal the “core claim” was effectively being heard for the first time, and further the subsidiary protection assessment was not in compliance with statutory requirements which gave effect to the Qualification Directive; and that he should have had a chance to comment on country of origin information used in the assessment of his application.
Date: 09-10-2009
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Country of origin information filterCountry of origin information
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 5
- Credibility assessment 5
- Subsidiary Protection 5
- Personal circumstances of applicant 4
- Burden of proof 3
- Gender Based Persecution 3
- Membership of a particular social group 3
- Trafficking in human beings 3
- Internal protection 2
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 2
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 2
- Procedural guarantees 2
- Subsequent application 2
- Access to the labour market 1
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 1
- Actors of protection 1
- Armed conflict 1
- Benefit of doubt 1
- Duty of applicant 1
- Effective remedy (right to) 1
- Final decision 1
- Indiscriminate violence 1
- Individual assessment 1
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 1
- Non-refoulement 1
- Obligation to give reasons 1
- Obligation/Duty to cooperate 1
- Persecution (acts of) 1
- Personal interview 1
- Political Opinion 1
- Real risk 1
- Sexual orientation 1
Filter by country of applicant
- (-) Remove Nigeria filterNigeria
Filter by country of decision
- Ireland 4
- Germany 2
- Italy 2
- Austria 1
- Switzerland 1
- United Kingdom 1
