You are here
Home ›EDAL case summaries
The judgment specifies standards for country of origin information to be used as proof in administrative and judicial proceedings. The evaluation report of the European Commission on the progress made by candidate countries is not intended for international protection proceedings, as these may only be used as supporting material together with other reports about the country of origin.
This case concerned the interpretation of Article 20(1)(d) and Article 20(2) of the Dublin Regulation and the analysis of time limits under these provisions when the Member State provides for suspensive effect of an appeal. The time limit for the period of implementation of the transfer begins to run, not as from the time of the provisional judicial decision suspending transfer but from the time of the judicial decision which rules on the merits of the procedure and which is no longer such as to prevent its implementation.
In an application for subsidiary protection made after a failed refugee claim (and after a Deportation Order has been made), the Minister has a discretion to consider the application, which he can exercise if there is new information or altered circumstances. The absence of such means that that the Minister is entitled to refuse to entertain the application; there is no automatic right to make such an application at that late stage of proceedings.
This concerned whether the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner (ORAC) were required to make an assessment of subsidiary protection, and whether ORAC were obliged to examine country of origin information in every case. The court found that ORAC were not required to make a subsidiary protection assessment. The Court held that ORAC were not obliged to examine country of origin information in every case.
The term "act of persecution" within the meaning of the Qualification Directive requires that an intentional infringement of a basic right as defined in Art. 9.1 of the Qualification Directive takes place. If the applicant has suffered past persecution (before his/her flight), it is no longer possible to deny refugee status solely on the ground that an internal protection alternative had existed in another part of the country of origin at the time of the flight (change of legal situation in the light of Art. 4.4 of the Qualification Directive).
The Kenyan applicant was a potential victim of female genital mutilation (FGM) and she faced forced marriage upon return. The Court stated that even if there was a risk of persecution in case of a return to the country of origin, the applicant could reasonably be expected to relocate internally as it was feasible in the circumstances.
The Migration Board set out the burden of proof for presenting an internal protection alternative. The area has to be clearly identified as well as being relevant and plausible.
The Ministry of Interior rejected the asylum claim of an Algerian woman who requested protection based on gender persecution by a non-state agent. The High National Court, on appeal, ruled that gender is considered as a “particular social group” and that it is not necessary that the persecution is carried out by state actors but also by non-state actors under certain circumstances. The applicant was granted Refugee status.
The Supreme Court held, in light of a UNHCR Report concerning Colombian asylum seekers, that the burden of proof had been reversed; the High National Court had to establish that the Colombian authorities could effectively protect the applicant from the agents of persecution.
This case concerned fear of persecution for reasons of race and membership of a particular social group. The provisions of Article 1(4) of Presidential Decree 61/1999, which should be interpreted with reference to Articles 3 and 22 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, recognize the special circumstances of asylum applications submitted by unaccompanied minors, for whom special procedural guarantees have been established. When examining asylum applications submitted by unaccompanied minors one must consider the Applicants' maturity and level of mental development; take into...
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
- National Case law 1420
- ECrtHR Case law 254
- CJEU Case law 125
Filter by applicable legal provisions
- European Union Law 1404
- Council of Europe Instruments 707
- International Law 539
- UNHCR Handbook 102
Filter by keywords
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 280
- Subsidiary Protection 256
- Effective remedy (right to) 248
- Detention 240
- Dublin Transfer 233
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 229
- Refugee Status 222
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 216
- Credibility assessment 211
- Procedural guarantees 202
- Effective access to procedures 185
- Membership of a particular social group 163
- Return 163
- Country of origin information 161
- Internal protection 158
- Individual assessment 125
- Well-founded fear 124
- Real risk 122
- Persecution (acts of) 121
- Responsibility for examining application 121
- Family unity (right to) 120
- Reception conditions 117
- Personal circumstances of applicant 116
- Non-refoulement 102
- Political Opinion 102
- Serious harm 98
- Burden of proof 97
- Exclusion from protection 95
- Best interest of the child 93
- Vulnerable person 92
- Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect) 88
- Subsequent application 87
- Protection 82
- Child Specific Considerations 81
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 79
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 79
- Internal armed conflict 78
- Standard of proof 78
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 77
- Unaccompanied minor 76
- Family member 74
- Material reception conditions 73
- Indiscriminate violence 72
- Relevant Documentation 72
- Gender Based Persecution 71
- Religion 71
- Torture 69
- Family reunification 68
- Relevant Facts 67
- Safe third country 67
- Individual threat 63
- Humanitarian considerations 61
- Personal interview 61
- Request to take back 61
- Country of origin 58
- Previous persecution 57
- Actors of protection 55
- Discrimination 55
- Obligation to give reasons 51
- Delay 49
- Sexual orientation 49
- Inadmissible application 48
- Accelerated procedure 47
- Health (right to) 47
- Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid 46
- Refugee sur place 46
- Armed conflict 42
- Revocation of protection status 42
- Terrorism 40
- First country of asylum 39
- Request that charge be taken 39
- Benefit of doubt 37
- Manifestly unfounded application 34
- Safe country of origin 33
- Access to the labour market 32
- Accommodation centre 32
- Nationality 31
- Residence document 30
- Crime against humanity 29
- Dependant (Dependent person) 29
- Duty of applicant 28
- Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN 26
- Race 25
- Visa 25
- Circumstances ceased to exist 24
- Final decision 24
- Serious non-political crime 24
- Obligation/Duty to cooperate 23
- Stateless person 22
- Freedom of movement (right to) 21
- Trafficking in human beings 20
- Cessation of protection 19
- Integration measures 18
- Indirect refoulement 17
- War crimes 17
- Female genital mutilation 15
- More favourable provisions 11
- Country of former habitual residence 10
- International armed conflict 10
- Death penalty / Execution 9
- Education (right to) 8
- Sponsor 8
- Withdrawal of protection application 8
- Temporary protection 4
- Genocide 3
Filter by date
Filter by country of applicant
- Afghanistan 218
- Iraq 125
- Iran 104
- Russia 92
- Syria 92
- Nigeria 88
- Somalia 84
- Turkey 60
- Unknown 59
- Pakistan 45
- Eritrea 43
- Russia (Chechnya) 41
- Algeria 37
- Sudan 37
- Congo (DRC) 36
- Sri Lanka 35
- Kosovo 27
- Palestinian Territory 25
- Morocco 23
- Ukraine 22
- Cameroon 21
- Guinea 19
- Ivory Coast 19
- Armenia 18
- Albania 17
- Ethiopia 16
- Lebanon 16
- Rwanda 16
- China 15
- Bangladesh 14
- Georgia 14
- Ghana 14
- Colombia 13
- Gambia 13
- Tunisia 13
- Egypt 12
- Serbia 12
- Senegal 11
- Bosnia and Herzegovina 10
- Sierra Leone 10
- Uzbekistan 10
- Mali 9
- Belarus 8
- India 8
- Kyrgyzstan 8
- Vietnam 8
- Angola 7
- Kazakhstan 7
- Mongolia 7
- Uganda 7
- Azerbaijan 6
- France 6
- Libya 6
- South Africa 6
- Togo 6
- United Kingdom 6
- Zimbabwe 6
- Burundi 5
- Croatia 5
- Mauritania 5
- Tanzania 5
- Bulgaria 4
- Jordan 4
- Kenya 4
- Lithuania 4
- Moldova 4
- United States 4
- Western Sahara 4
- Brazil 3
- China (Tibet) 3
- Cuba 3
- Germany 3
- Liberia 3
- Macedonia 3
- Benin 2
- Bhutan 2
- Botswana 2
- Chad 2
- Congo (Republic of) 2
- Cyprus 2
- Haiti 2
- Israel 2
- Kuwait 2
- Myanmar 2
- Niger 2
- North Korea 2
- Saudi Arabia 2
- Slovakia 2
- South Korea 2
- Tajikistan 2
- Venezuela 2
- Austria 1
- Burkina Faso 1
- Central African Republic 1
- Comoros 1
- Czech Republic 1
- Djibouti 1
- Dominican Republic 1
- Ecuador 1
- Gabon 1
- Greece 1
- Guinea-Bissau 1
- Indonesia 1
- Italy 1
- Jamaica 1
- Madagascar 1
- Malawi 1
- Montenegro 1
- Namibia 1
- Nepal 1
- New Zealand 1
- Philippines 1
- Poland 1
- Romania 1
- Thailand 1
- Zambia 1
Filter by country of decision
- France 177
- Germany 162
- United Kingdom 149
- Austria 97
- Ireland 88
- Belgium 85
- Sweden 74
- Netherlands 66
- Spain 62
- Greece 59
- Czech Republic 58
- Poland 58
- Italy 52
- Hungary 47
- Finland 42
- Slovenia 35
- Slovakia 30
- Denmark 25
- Switzerland 17
- Luxembourg 16
- Portugal 13
- Cyprus 7