You are here
Home › Relevant Documentation ›EDAL case summaries
Country of Decision: Greece
Keywords: Family member, Refugee Status, Relevant Documentation
The domestic body of civil law and civil procedure relating to family disputes was found to be applicable in accordance with Articles 12 and 16 of the 1951 Geneva Convention, as the applicant was a recognised refugee in the country and needed to end her marriage.
Date: 31-12-2019
Country of Decision: Germany
Country of Applicant: Iraq
Keywords: Dependant (Dependent person), Family reunification, Relevant Documentation, Relevant Facts, Visa
A birth certificate is not a decision within the meaning of paragraph 108 FamFG. As a child grows older the need of beeing looked after by both its parents decreases. There is no necessity for interim order in the case of family reunification, when the child is about to come of age, as the right to subsequent immigration is not lost upon the child’s coming of age according to the CJEU.
Date: 04-09-2018
Country of Applicant: France, Morocco
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Country of origin information, Detention, Effective access to procedures, Real risk, Relevant Documentation, Relevant Facts, Return, Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect), Safe country of origin, Terrorism
After being notified of his return decision, set to take place on the same day, the applicant requested an interim measure on Article 3 ECHR grounds in the morning but was nonetheless expelled to Morocco in the afternoon. The Court found no violation of Article 3, regarding the applicant’s expulsion to Morocco, by taking into account subsequent information. It found a violation of Article 34 of the Convention, owing to the fact that the applicant had no sufficient time to file a request to the Court, hence running the risk back then of being potentially subjected to treatment prohibited...
Date: 19-07-2018
Country of Decision: Denmark
Country of Applicant: China
Keywords: Country of origin information, Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Political Opinion, Refugee Status, Relevant Documentation, Torture
The applicant, a Chinese citizen, feared, if she returned to China, she would be persecuted and exposed to torture by the Chinese Communist Government due to her Falun Gong activities.
The Refugee Appeals Board did not find that she was a particular profiled member of Falun Gong or that she was wanted by the Chinese Authorities as she left China legally notwithstanding that she had been detained several times for shorter periods and imprisoned for seven years during which she was exposed to torture. However, the Board found that the Chinese Authorities were aware of the applicant ‘s...
Date: 18-06-2018
Country of Decision: Denmark
Country of Applicant: Iraq
Keywords: Country of origin information, Personal circumstances of applicant, Refugee Status, Relevant Documentation, Sexual orientation, Well-founded fear
The applicant, an ethnic Kurd and Sunni Muslim from Kirkuk, Iraq, became aware of his sexual orientation when he was 20/22 years of age and has since had relations with several men and during a longer period worked as a prostitute.
The Refugee Appeals Board accepted the applicants account and found that the applicant as a Kurd from Northern Iraq, according to country of origin information, would risk persecution if he was to return to Iraq and live openly as a homosexual. Consequently, the applicant was granted refugee status under the Danish Aliens Act art. 7 (1).
Date: 06-03-2018
Country of Decision: Sweden
Country of Applicant: Eritrea
Keywords: Dependant (Dependent person), Family member, Family reunification, Relevant Documentation, Standard of proof
The Appellant and the appellant’s children were applying for leave to remain in Sweden due to affiliation with their husband and father respectively who had been granted a permanent right of residency in Sweden as a refugee - despite them not being able to prove their identities. Due to the appellant’s lack of relevant documentation for her and the children, the court had to consider the circumstances in which a person can be granted alleviation of evidentiary burden in terms of proving their identity.
The Migration Court of Appeal granted the appeal and held that...
Date: 05-03-2018
Country of Decision: Denmark
Country of Applicant: Syria
Keywords: Actor of persecution or serious harm, Country of origin information, Internal armed conflict, Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Refugee Status, Relevant Documentation
The complainant, an Ethnic Arab and Sunni Muslim from Damascus, Syria, was granted temporary protection under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (3).
On 1 March 2017, the complainant lodged a complaint claiming refugee status under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (1).
The Board accepted that the complainant, who did not want to be redrafted into the Syrian Army, if he returned to Syria, would be at risk of being recalled to military service and therefore at specific and individual risk of persecution covered by the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (1). Consequently, the complainant was granted...
Date: 01-03-2018
Country of Decision: Denmark
Country of Applicant: Somalia
Keywords: Burden of proof, Duty of applicant, Relevant Documentation, Relevant Facts, Subsidiary Protection
The complainant is a Sunni Muslim from Mogadishu, Somalia. In July 2015 the Danish Immigration Service decided that his subsidiary protection status under the Danish Aliens Act. Art. 7 (2) had lapsed according to the Danish Aliens Act Art. 17 (1) and (4). The Refugee Appeals Board did not consider that the Danish Immigrations Service had lifted its burden of proof according to the Danish Aliens Act Art 17 (4). Consequently, the Board granted the complainant continued subsidiary protection under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (2).
Date: 01-12-2017
Country of Decision: France
Keywords: Effective access to procedures, Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid, Procedural guarantees, Relevant Documentation, Subsequent application
The National Court for the Right of Asylum (CNDA) has a responsibility to follow the general rules on closing files. Where this is not done, the Court can be found negligent.
Date: 24-11-2017
Country of Decision: Greece
Country of Applicant: Turkey
Keywords: Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Relevant Documentation, Residence document
The use of forged documents by asylum seekers, when attempting to flee from one country and seek protection under international law in another country, is not criminally liable, when it is the result of a well-founded fear for inhuman or degrading treatment.
Date: 13-10-2017
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Relevant Documentation filterRelevant Documentation
- Credibility assessment 25
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 21
- Relevant Facts 20
- Country of origin information 18
- Refugee Status 16
- Well-founded fear 16
- Procedural guarantees 14
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 12
- Subsidiary Protection 10
- Burden of proof 9
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 8
- Real risk 8
- Standard of proof 8
- Duty of applicant 7
- Obligation to give reasons 7
- Personal circumstances of applicant 7
- Religion 7
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 6
- Detention 6
- Effective access to procedures 6
- Internal protection 6
- Persecution (acts of) 6
- Political Opinion 6
- Subsequent application 6
- Effective remedy (right to) 5
- Individual assessment 5
- Individual threat 5
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 5
- Membership of a particular social group 5
- Personal interview 5
- Protection 5
- Torture 5
- Benefit of doubt 4
- Dependant (Dependent person) 4
- Family member 4
- Family reunification 4
- Best interest of the child 3
- Child Specific Considerations 3
- Family unity (right to) 3
- First country of asylum 3
- Internal armed conflict 3
- Nationality 3
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 3
- Previous persecution 3
- Refugee sur place 3
- Unaccompanied minor 3
- Accelerated procedure 2
- Country of origin 2
- Dublin Transfer 2
- Material reception conditions 2
- Non-refoulement 2
- Reception conditions 2
- Residence document 2
- Responsibility for examining application 2
- Return 2
- Safe third country 2
- Sexual orientation 2
- Visa 2
- Accommodation centre 1
- Actors of protection 1
- Cessation of protection 1
- Circumstances ceased to exist 1
- Crime against humanity 1
- Delay 1
- Discrimination 1
- Exclusion from protection 1
- Health (right to) 1
- Humanitarian considerations 1
- Inadmissible application 1
- Indirect refoulement 1
- Indiscriminate violence 1
- Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid 1
- Manifestly unfounded application 1
- Request to take back 1
- Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect) 1
- Safe country of origin 1
- Serious harm 1
- Sponsor 1
- Stateless person 1
- Terrorism 1
- Vulnerable person 1
Filter by date
Filter by country of applicant
- Iraq 7
- Somalia 6
- Iran 5
- Bangladesh 4
- Afghanistan 3
- Pakistan 3
- Syria 3
- Turkey 3
- Unknown 3
- Eritrea 2
- Lebanon 2
- Nigeria 2
- Russia 2
- Russia (Chechnya) 2
- Sri Lanka 2
- Sudan 2
- China 1
- Colombia 1
- Congo (DRC) 1
- Congo (Republic of) 1
- Ethiopia 1
- France 1
- Georgia 1
- Ghana 1
- India 1
- Kosovo 1
- Morocco 1
- Nepal 1
- Rwanda 1
- Tanzania 1
- United Kingdom 1
