EDAL case summaries
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 Facts, Subsidiary Protection
The complainant, an Ethnic Maktumin Stateless Kurd from Amuda, Al-Hasakah, Syria, was granted temporary protection under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (3).
On 31 August 2017 the complainant lodged a complaint claiming refugee status under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (1) or alternatively subsidiary protection under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (2).
The Board found that the complainant fulfilled the conditions for subsidiary protection under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (2) as he would risk participating in acts of war during the compulsory military service.
Date: 25-05-2018
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: Denmark
Country of Applicant: Somalia
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Country of origin information, Credibility assessment, Relevant Facts, Revocation of protection status, Subsidiary Protection
The complainant is an ethnic Galadi and a Muslim from Afgoye, Somalia. On 6 April 2017, the Danish Immigration Service decided not to prolong the complainant’s subsidiary protection under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 11 (2), cf. Art. 19 (1) no. 1 and Art. 19 (7) cf. Art. 26 (1).
After an overall assessment of the country of origin information the Board found that a deportation of the complainant to Afgoye no longer constitutes a violation of Denmark’s international obligations including ECHR article 3. However, regarding the assessment under the Aliens Act article 26, the Board found...
Date: 01-12-2017
Country of Decision: Denmark
Country of Applicant: Somalia
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Country of origin, Country of origin information, Gender Based Persecution, Internal protection, Non-state actors/agents of persecution, Personal circumstances of applicant, Real risk, Relevant Facts, Subsidiary Protection
The applicant, an ethnic Somali and a Sunni Muslim belonging to the Darood Clan and Ogaden Sub-Clan, was born and raised in Libya.
The Board found that the applicant was, as her parents and siblings, a Somali citizen. Further, considering that Somali was not the applicant’s mother tongue, that she only with difficulty was able to speak, read or write in this language, that she in reality had never been to Somalia, that she does not know anyone in this country, and is a single mother with a son of five years old, the Board found that, in accordance with the ECtHR judgement R.H...
Date: 20-01-2017
Country of Decision: Austria
Country of Applicant: Ukraine
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Country of origin information, Individual assessment, Internal protection, Obligation to give reasons, Persecution (acts of), Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Personal circumstances of applicant, Political Opinion, Refugee Status, Relevant Facts, Subsidiary Protection
In the course of an asylum procedure, the statements of the asylum seeker have to be assessed integrally. This includes, inter alia, an analysis of (up-to-date) country reports. However, such analysis is not carried out in a sufficient manner where there are only superficial references to the country of origin information. Rather, it is required that the information contained is actually taken into consideration when taking the decision, applied to the specific circumstances of each case and compared to the information provided by the asylum seeker(s).
... Date: 17-11-2016
Country of Decision: Germany
Country of Applicant: Somalia
Keywords: Inadmissible application, Refugee Status, Relevant Facts, Subsidiary Protection
An application for asylum filed prior to 20 July 2015 cannot be considered inadmissible because subsidiary protection has already been granted by another Member State (if the protection applied for is more favourable than the existing protection). The assessment of the admissibility of an application for asylum filed prior to 20 July 2015 is subject to the laws, regulations and administrative provisions adopted pursuant to the now superseded Asylum Procedures Directive (Directive 2005/85/EU) which provided for inadmissibility of an application for asylum if refugee status had already been...
Date: 04-08-2016
Country of Decision: Slovenia
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Circumstances ceased to exist, Effective remedy (right to), Non-refoulement, Relevant Facts, Subsidiary Protection
Termination of an applicant’s international protection status (ie where there is a change or termination of protection grounds) must be examined against the principle of non-refoulement, which ensures the right to a fair and efficient procedure in which the Asylum authority assesses if non-refoulement would be violated where protection ceases.
It results from the principle of non-refoulement that the applicant in proceedings on termination of subsidiary protection must have the possibility to state all the reasons for which subsidiary protection should not cease.
In the...
Date: 15-10-2015
Country of Decision: Slovenia
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Circumstances ceased to exist, Country of origin information, Indiscriminate violence, Relevant Documentation, Relevant Facts, Serious harm, Subsidiary Protection
By not considering country information submitted by the applicant, the Slovenian Migration Office did not establish all relevant facts and circumstances of the case before it. The Office had not clearly and precisely explained which reasons it considered as decisive in determining that the degree of indiscriminate violence in the applicant’s country of origin did not reach such a level that the applicant would be subjected to a serious and individual threat to his life or person in the event of return to his country of origin.
Date: 10-04-2014
Country of Decision: Ireland
Country of Applicant: Somalia, Tanzania
Keywords: Credibility assessment, Duty of applicant, Relevant Documentation, Relevant Facts, Subsidiary Protection
The Minister based a subsidiary protection decision and deportation order examination on the premise that the Applicant was a Tanzanian national based on records that were provided by the UK Border Agency to that effect, in circumstances where the Applicant claimed that he was Somali; that the Tanzanian identity was false; and he claimed that two language reports which were supportive of his claim of Somali nationality and submitted in a separate application for a subsequent asylum claim should have been considered by the Minister in the making of his subsidiary protection and deportation...
Date: 18-07-2013
Country of Decision: Austria
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Child Specific Considerations, Credibility assessment, Personal circumstances of applicant, Personal interview, Relevant Facts, Subsidiary Protection, Unaccompanied minor
The age of the child and the mental state of the Applicant as well as the ban on more detailed questioning on the reasons for fleeing in the initial police interview should have been taken into account to a greater extent when assessing the assertion of flight. The lack of discussion of these aspects represents a failure to investigate several decisive points, which made the decision by the Asylum Court arbitrary and therefore unconstitutional
Date: 27-06-2012
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Relevant Facts filterRelevant Facts
- (-) Remove Subsidiary Protection filterSubsidiary Protection
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 5
- Country of origin information 5
- Relevant Documentation 4
- Credibility assessment 3
- Personal circumstances of applicant 3
- Refugee Status 3
- Circumstances ceased to exist 2
- Duty of applicant 2
- Internal protection 2
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 2
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 1
- Burden of proof 1
- Child Specific Considerations 1
- Country of origin 1
- Effective remedy (right to) 1
- Gender Based Persecution 1
- Inadmissible application 1
- Indiscriminate violence 1
- Individual assessment 1
- Internal armed conflict 1
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 1
- Non-refoulement 1
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 1
- Obligation to give reasons 1
- Persecution (acts of) 1
- Personal interview 1
- Political Opinion 1
- Real risk 1
- Revocation of protection status 1
- Serious harm 1
- Unaccompanied minor 1
