You are here
Home › More favourable provisions ›EDAL case summaries
The CJEU ruled on family reunification visas for the family of an individual with subsidiary protection status. It was found that an application for family reunification based on refugee status can be rejected if it was not made within three months of the sponsor receiving refugee status. However, there must be the possibility of lodging a fresh application under a different set of rules provided that national legislation:
– lays down that such a ground of refusal cannot apply to situations in which particular circumstances render the late...
The case concerns an application for the annulment of the decision of the Appeals Committee which rejected the applicant’s previous application to overturn the decision of the Regional Asylum Office of Samos whereby he was denied international protection. The Court determined that the case was inadmissible, accepted the relevant justifications given by the Appeals Committee and rejected the application.
The Regional Administrative Court of Upper Austria requests a preliminary ruling of the CJEU concerning the interpretation of Article 29 Directive 2011/95/EU in the context of social assistance for persons entitled to asylum with a temporary residence permit.
1) Must Article 29 Directive 2011/95/EU, entitling persons subject to international protection to the same level of social assistance in the Member State as nationals of this Member State, be interpreted as fulfilling the conditions for direct effect as set out in the CJEU’s jurisprudence?
2) Must Article 29 Directive...
The Constitutional Court ruled that Section 5(3) Nr. 4 NÖ MSG, which excludes beneficiaries of subsidiary protection from benefiting from social assistance out of the means-tested minimum income scheme when the person already receives social assistance covered by NÖ GVG is compatible with constitutional rights. It held that it does not constitute a violation of the principle of non-discrimination amongst foreigners. Given the provisional character of residence rights for beneficiaries of subsidiary protection such a legal rule falls within the wide margin of appreciation of the legislator...
The legal proceedings relating to an appeal regarding the granting of international protection are a summary process that give the judge certain official powers. As a consequence, the judge should decide on the merits of an appeal even if the Applicant fails to attend the hearing.
It is the duty of the administrative body to deal reasonably with objections to intrusion into the private and family life of the applicant within international protection proceedings.
This was the substantive hearing of a case in which leave to seek judicial review of a subsidiary protection decision was granted on the basis that (a) it was arguably erroneous to conclude that because State protection was available in respect of the actions of non-State agents who inflicted serious injury on the Applicant, the said injury could not amount to "serious harm;" and (b) The decision failed to consider whether, arising out of the previous harm suffered by the Applicant, compelling reasons existed to warrant a determination that she was eligible for subsidiary protection. The...
These joined cases concerned two Applicants who were denied protection in Germany on the basis of the exclusion provisions in the Qualification Directive. Upon appeal the German Courts found that even if they were excluded under the Qualification Directive they may still entitled to the right of asylum recognised under Article 16A of the Grundgesetz. The CJEU, in examining Article 12, the exclusion provision in the Qualification Directive, found that the fact a person was a member of an organisation which is on the EU Common Position List 2001/931/CFSP due to its involvement in...
For the purposes of access to legal cover for persons applying for international protection, documents issued by the Italian police certifying a person’s identity (residence permit) should be considered as being valid and wholly sufficient to identify the foreigner and, in consequence, to provide legal aid at the State’s expense, regardless of the precise particulars in the country of origin.
Subsidiary protection pursuant to Art. 14a(2)(b) of the Act on Asylum (serious harm consisting of inhuman or degrading treatment) may also be granted in so-called humanitarian cases. This goes beyond the scope of Article 15(b) of the Qualification Directive; however, it is compatible with the directive. In order to grant subsidiary protection in so-called humanitarian cases, the factual circumstances need to reach the standard set out in the judgment of the ECtHR, D. v. the United Kingdom.
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove More favourable provisions filterMore favourable provisions
- Subsidiary Protection 6
- Family reunification 3
- Protection 3
- Effective remedy (right to) 2
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2
- Serious harm 2
- Accelerated procedure 1
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 1
- Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN 1
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 1
- Dependant (Dependent person) 1
- Dublin Transfer 1
- Duty of applicant 1
- Effective access to procedures 1
- Exclusion from protection 1
- Family member 1
- Family unity (right to) 1
- First country of asylum 1
- Gender Based Persecution 1
- Inadmissible application 1
- Individual assessment 1
- Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid 1
- Manifestly unfounded application 1
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 1
- Personal circumstances of applicant 1
- Personal interview 1
- Previous persecution 1
- Refugee Status 1
- Safe third country 1
- Serious non-political crime 1
- Terrorism 1
- Torture 1
Filter by country of applicant
- Ivory Coast 2
- Nigeria 2
- Afghanistan 1
- Iraq 1
- Syria 1
- Vietnam 1
Filter by country of decision
- Austria 2
- Czech Republic 2
- Italy 2
- Greece 1
- Ireland 1