You are here
Home › Georgia ›EDAL case summaries
Delays in the asylum procedure which cannot be imputed to the asylum seeker, and failure to consider less coercive alternatives when detention exceeds reasonable time limits, render detention unlawful.
In some cases of severe illness Art. 3 ECHR precludes a deportation even though a treatment in the state of origin is possible. If the appellant cannot bear the costs of the treatment or the necessary concomitant medication the renewed increase of the illness and therefore a real life-threatening risk is probable which precludes the deportation of the applicant.
On the basis of CJEU jurisprudence, the administrative tribunal found that all asylum applicants have a right to appeal the manner in which the responsibility criteria of Dublin III has been applied to their individual case and the determination of a responsible Member State where there are systemic deficiencies.
Article 3 ECHR is triggered in cases involving the removal of a seriously ill individual where the absence of appropriate treatment in the receiving country or the lack of access to such treatment, exposes the individual to a serious, rapid and irreversible decline in his or her state of health resulting in intense suffering or to a significant reduction in life expectancy.
Access to sufficient and appropriate medical care must be available in reality, not merely in theory and the impact of removal on an applicant must be assessed by considering how an applicant’s condition would...
The European Court of Human Rights has held that the detention conditions in the Police Directors of the Aliens Directorate of Thessaloniki and Attica Aliens Directorate, where a Georgian national was held, amounted to inhumane treatment. However, the Court declined to accept that the individual’s right to liberty and security along with his right to judicially review the legality of his detention had been infringed.
The ECtHR holds that Russia is in violation of Article 5 ECHR and of Article 4 of Protocol 4 through the implementation of an unlawful administrative practice against a large number of Georgian nationals as a means of identifying them. This led to the arrest, detention and collective expulsion of 4634 Georgians from the Russian Federation and further violations of Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention.
Detention conditions in Greece contrary to Article 3 of the Convention; Lack of effective review of the lawfulness of detention in violation of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention.
Acts of a criminal nature cannot be equated with persecution within the meaning of grounds cited under the Convention. Public authorities in the country of origin, which the family of the foreignor did not contact, are supposed to provide protection against risks posed by individual citizens.
The applicant applied to the Minister to be readmitted to the asylum system many years after he had made a first application for refugee status which had been refused for non-attendance at a refugee interview. There was no new claim as such nor was there any new evidence to support the application. The Court found that the Minister was only required to decide whether what was adduced was ‘new’. The Minister’s obligation was not altered by the fact that the original application had not been fully processed but had been abandoned by the applicant and deemed withdrawn. An applicant is not...
The poor living conditions that the Applicants would face in the safe areas in Georgia meant they could not reasonably be expected to remain there. There was no feasible internal protection alternative
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- Detention 5
- Effective remedy (right to) 5
- Effective access to procedures 4
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 4
- Country of origin information 2
- Dublin Transfer 2
- Family unity (right to) 2
- Health (right to) 2
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 2
- Personal circumstances of applicant 2
- Reception conditions 2
- Return 2
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 1
- Actors of protection 1
- Burden of proof 1
- Country of origin 1
- Delay 1
- Dependant (Dependent person) 1
- Discrimination 1
- Individual assessment 1
- Internal protection 1
- Nationality 1
- Non-refoulement 1
- Persecution (acts of) 1
- Procedural guarantees 1
- Protection 1
- Refugee Status 1
- Relevant Documentation 1
- Request to take back 1
- Responsibility for examining application 1
- Subsequent application 1
- Subsidiary Protection 1
- Vulnerable person 1
- Well-founded fear 1
Filter by country of applicant
- (-) Remove Georgia filterGeorgia
- Indonesia 1
- Russia 1
- Russia (Chechnya) 1