You are here
Home › Refugee Status ›EDAL case summaries
A stateless person from Palestine who was registered by UNRWA and received its assistance shall not be excluded from refugee status when it is established that his personal safety in Palestine is at serious risk and it is impossible for UNRWA to guarantee that the living conditions, which has forced the individual to leave Palestine, are compatible with its mission.
From the available evidence, the Court concludes that UNRWA is unable to provide protection and assistance to Palestinian refugees in Gaza.
An applicant that has received protection on behalf of UNRWA is not required to prove a fear of persecution to be recognised as a refugee; the asylum authorities have to examine whether the applicant was actually receiving UNRWA protection and whether that protection has ceased.
An individual examination of the case will reveal whether the cessation of UNRWA protection resulted from objective reasons that the agency could not rectify.
National authorities are best placed to assess the credibility of asylum claimants.
The ill-treatment of people of non-Arab ethnic origin in Sudan is not systematic. Therefore, when the personal circumstances of an applicant that may create a risk of persecution are insufficiently substantiated, the applicant’s removal to Sudan will not give rise to a violation of Article 3 of the Convention.
In the case of an Afghan Shia Hazara applicant, the Belgian Council for Alien Litigation considered that the request for international protection was based on several sources of fear, which must be analysed in combination with each other, forming a cluster of concordant evidence.
The Council granted the applicant refugee status.
The parents and minor siblings of a Syrian national, who was recognised as a refugee, cannot claim refugee status in terms of international protection for family members, if the beneficiary, although a minor when he was registered as an asylum applicant, was no longer a minor at the time of the court hearing.
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.
Article 10(2) of Directive 2003/86 allows Member States to define autonomously the nature of the relationship of dependence between the sponsor and the family member not referred in art. 4, as long as the national law have regard of all the relevant circumstances of the refugee’s situation through a case-by-case approach.
In order to guarantee that an applicant for international protection has an effective judicial remedy within the meaning of Article 47 of the Charter, a national court or tribunal is required to vary a decision of the first-instance determining body that does not comply with its previous judgment. The court or tribunal must substitute its own decision on the application for international protection by disapplying, if necessary, the national law that prohibits it from proceeding in that way.
The recognition of gender identity is a matter of respect towards the individual’s personality, protected under Greek and international law and applicable by analogy to refugees. Refugees must be able to request assistance from the authorities of the host-country, as refugeehood entails severed ties with the country of origin making it impossible for recognised refugees to request official actions from their governments.
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
- National Case law 152
- ECrtHR Case law 58
- CJEU Case law 11
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Refugee Status filterRefugee Status
- Well-founded fear 55
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 50
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 49
- Real risk 48
- Detention 40
- Protection 39
- Subsidiary Protection 39
- Effective remedy (right to) 37
- Persecution (acts of) 36
- Country of origin information 35
- Membership of a particular social group 34
- Credibility assessment 32
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 30
- Political Opinion 28
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 23
- Procedural guarantees 23
- Individual assessment 22
- Personal circumstances of applicant 22
- Non-refoulement 20
- Discrimination 17
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 17
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 17
- Return 17
- Effective access to procedures 16
- Internal protection 16
- Relevant Documentation 16
- Torture 16
- Child Specific Considerations 15
- Family unity (right to) 15
- Relevant Facts 15
- Sexual orientation 15
- Country of origin 14
- Obligation to give reasons 14
- Exclusion from protection 13
- Family member 13
- Material reception conditions 13
- Reception conditions 13
- Religion 12
- Safe country of origin 12
- Gender Based Persecution 11
- Previous persecution 11
- Unaccompanied minor 11
- Best interest of the child 10
- Personal interview 10
- Actors of protection 9
- Burden of proof 9
- Dependant (Dependent person) 9
- Dublin Transfer 9
- Race 9
- Standard of proof 9
- Subsequent application 9
- Duty of applicant 8
- Family reunification 8
- Inadmissible application 8
- Individual threat 8
- Internal armed conflict 8
- Revocation of protection status 8
- Serious harm 7
- Stateless person 7
- Terrorism 7
- Access to the labour market 6
- Female genital mutilation 6
- Final decision 6
- First country of asylum 6
- Health (right to) 6
- Manifestly unfounded application 6
- Refugee sur place 6
- Safe third country 6
- Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN 5
- Armed conflict 5
- Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid 5
- Request to take back 5
- Responsibility for examining application 5
- Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect) 5
- Serious non-political crime 5
- Accelerated procedure 4
- Accommodation centre 4
- Crime against humanity 4
- Humanitarian considerations 4
- Benefit of doubt 3
- Delay 3
- Integration measures 3
- International armed conflict 3
- Nationality 3
- Request that charge be taken 3
- Residence document 3
- Vulnerable person 3
- War crimes 3
- Cessation of protection 2
- Country of former habitual residence 2
- Freedom of movement (right to) 2
- Indiscriminate violence 2
- Obligation/Duty to cooperate 2
- Sponsor 2
- Trafficking in human beings 2
- Visa 2
- Circumstances ceased to exist 1
- Death penalty / Execution 1
- Education (right to) 1
- Indirect refoulement 1
- More favourable provisions 1
- Temporary protection 1
- Withdrawal of protection application 1
Filter by date
Filter by country of applicant
- Afghanistan 24
- Syria 23
- Turkey 17
- Russia 14
- Somalia 13
- Iran 10
- Nigeria 9
- Iraq 7
- Pakistan 7
- Palestinian Territory 7
- Sudan 7
- Congo (DRC) 6
- Lebanon 6
- Sri Lanka 6
- Russia (Chechnya) 5
- Sierra Leone 5
- Bangladesh 4
- Egypt 4
- Ethiopia 4
- Albania 3
- Algeria 3
- Cameroon 3
- Eritrea 3
- India 3
- Senegal 3
- Unknown 3
- Azerbaijan 2
- China 2
- Gambia 2
- Ivory Coast 2
- Jordan 2
- Kyrgyzstan 2
- Morocco 2
- Rwanda 2
- South Africa 2
- Tunisia 2
- Uganda 2
- United Kingdom 2
- Angola 1
- Congo (Republic of) 1
- Czech Republic 1
- France 1
- Georgia 1
- Ghana 1
- Guinea-Bissau 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 26
- Germany 18
- France 16
- United Kingdom 14
- Ireland 13
- Poland 11
- Austria 10
- Sweden 10
- Denmark 9
- Hungary 9
- Italy 7
- Spain 2
- Switzerland 2
- Belgium 1
- Cyprus 1
- Czech Republic 1
- Netherlands 1
- Slovenia 1