EDAL case summaries
Country of Decision: Hungary
Country of Applicant: Egypt
Keywords: Child Specific Considerations, Non-state actors/agents of persecution, Persecution (acts of), Protection, Real risk, Refugee Status, Relevant Facts, Religion, Well-founded fear
The Immigration and Asylum Office unlawfully rejected the claimant’s application for international protection. The court found that the authorities did not objectively assess the evidence and country information provided by the claimant, a Coptic Christian from Egypt. They also failed to correctly interpret the definition of a refugee in accordance with international law and disregarded the special status of the claimant who was an underage applicant.
Date: 22-09-2017
Country of Decision: Denmark
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Internal protection, Non-state actors/agents of persecution, Refugee Status, Relevant Facts, Religion
The applicant, an ethnic Turkman and an atheist from Aache, Afghanistan had received death threats from local residents close to the imam as well as from his own father because of his apostasy.
The Refugee Appeals Board found that the applicant because of his apostacy would be at risk of being persecuted by local residents, Afghan authorities and the Taleban. Consequently, the applicant was granted refugee status under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (1).
Date: 13-06-2017
Country of Decision: Germany
Country of Applicant: Syria
Keywords: Country of origin information, Duty of applicant, Political Opinion, Refugee Status, Religion, Subsidiary Protection, Torture
When deciding whether refugee status should be available , one must not only consider any pre-persecution but also post-flight circumstances. Judged on a forward looking basis of persecution of political enemies within Syrian territory, upon return to Syria there continues to be a danger of individual persecution including human rights violations by reason of belonging to a certain group.
Date: 07-10-2016
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Burden of proof, Country of origin information, Final decision, Individual assessment, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Membership of a particular social group, Non-refoulement, Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Personal circumstances of applicant, Political Opinion, Protection, Refugee Status, Refugee sur place, Religion, Return
An Article 3 compliant assessment requires a full and ex nunc evaluation of a claim. Where the State is made aware of facts that could expose an applicant to an individual risk of ill-treatment, regardless of whether the applicant chooses to rely on such facts, it is obliged to assess this risk ex proprio motu.
Date: 23-03-2016
Country of Decision: Germany
Country of Applicant: Iraq
Keywords: Actor of persecution or serious harm, Armed conflict, Crime against humanity, Indiscriminate violence, Membership of a particular social group, Non-state actors/agents of persecution, Previous persecution, Refugee Status, Religion, Unaccompanied minor
In light of a deterioration of safety conditions in Iraq since June 10th 2014 members of the Yazidi religious group living in the province of Ninive (Mosul) are in danger of persecution solely on the basis of their religious beliefs, from which they can’t reasonably seek effective protection from the Iraqi state nor from any other organization, which could offer protection. Furthermore they can’t now, nor will they for the foreseeable future be able to evade persecution by seeking refuge in safe havens within country boarders.
Date: 15-08-2014
Country of Decision: Germany
Country of Applicant: Pakistan
Keywords: Actor of persecution or serious harm, Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Personal circumstances of applicant, Refugee Status, Religion, Serious harm
The concept of a serious violation of religious freedom according to Article 9(1)(a) of the Qualification Directive (2004/83/EC) does not simply refer to a serious encroachment on the freedom to practice one’s faith in private but also the freedom to practice religion in a public context.
The enforced renunciation of religious activities can constitute persecution. Since persecution may lie in the prohibition itself, the actual future behaviour of the asylum-seeker and associated involvement in the other legal interests of the party concerned (e.g. life and freedom) are not relevant...
Date: 20-02-2013
Country of Decision: Austria
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Child Specific Considerations, Discrimination, Gender Based Persecution, Membership of a particular social group, Persecution (acts of), Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Personal circumstances of applicant, Political Opinion, Refugee Status, Religion, Well-founded fear
Neither the Applicant, who was approximately nine years old at the time of the decision, nor her parents had submitted reasons for persecution specifically relevant to the Applicant in the proceedings at the court of first instance or in the appeal. Despite this, the Asylum Court reached the conclusion – amongst other things after a personal hearing of the Applicant – that the Applicant would be persecuted directly by the state or privately in Afghanistan owing to her membership of a particular social group and the religious-political attitude to which she would be subjected. In doing so...
Date: 06-12-2012
Country of Decision: Greece
Country of Applicant: India
Keywords: Actor of persecution or serious harm, Exclusion from protection, Humanitarian considerations, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Protection, Refugee Status, Religion, Serious non-political crime, Subsidiary Protection
Application for annulment of a decision by the Minister of Public Order.
This case concerned special protection status in accordance with the 1951 Refugee Convention andexclusion from protection of those who have committed a serious crime under “common law”. The crime committed by the applicant (attempted murder of the Indian Ambassador in Romania) does not fall within the concepts of “political”, “composite” or “related” crimes, even if it was carried out because of the offender's political opinions or principles, or with the intent of achieving such aims. The implementation of the...
Date: 08-05-2012
Country of Decision: France
Country of Applicant: Eritrea, Ethiopia
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Individual assessment, Nationality, Persecution (acts of), Protection, Refugee Status, Relevant Documentation, Religion
When the asylum claim of an applicant has not been individually assessed, the National Court of Asylum has to cancel the asylum refusal decision and the asylum claim has to be reassessed by the OFPRA.
Date: 21-02-2012
Country of Decision: Greece
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Actor of persecution or serious harm, Actors of protection, Country of origin information, Credibility assessment, Discrimination, Internal protection, Membership of a particular social group, Non-state actors/agents of persecution, Persecution (acts of), Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Protection, Real risk, Refugee Status, Relevant Documentation, Religion, Unaccompanied minor, Well-founded fear
Appeal against the General Secretary of the Ministry of Public Order's negative decision no 95/52986 of 28.4.2006 on a claim for asylum before the Appeal Committees formed pursuant to Articles 26 & 32 of Presidential Decree 114/2010 and the Minister of Citizen Protection's decision 5401/3-505533 of 7.11.2011 (385/8-11-2011 FEK YODD) pursuant to which the present Committee was formed.
This case involved a fear of persecution because of religious beliefs (atheism) as well as because of membership of a particular social group (personality shaped in a non-Islamic society /...
Date: 15-11-2011
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Refugee Status filterRefugee Status
- (-) Remove Religion filterReligion
- Protection 6
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 5
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 4
- Membership of a particular social group 4
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 4
- Persecution (acts of) 4
- Well-founded fear 4
- Country of origin information 3
- Personal circumstances of applicant 3
- Political Opinion 3
- Real risk 3
- Relevant Documentation 3
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 2
- Child Specific Considerations 2
- Credibility assessment 2
- Discrimination 2
- Duty of applicant 2
- Individual assessment 2
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 2
- Internal protection 2
- Obligation to give reasons 2
- Relevant Facts 2
- Subsidiary Protection 2
- Unaccompanied minor 2
- Actors of protection 1
- Armed conflict 1
- Burden of proof 1
- Crime against humanity 1
- Exclusion from protection 1
- Final decision 1
- Gender Based Persecution 1
- Humanitarian considerations 1
- Indiscriminate violence 1
- Nationality 1
- Non-refoulement 1
- Personal interview 1
- Previous persecution 1
- Refugee sur place 1
- Return 1
- Serious harm 1
- Serious non-political crime 1
- Torture 1
Filter by country of applicant
- Afghanistan 3
- Iran 2
- Bangladesh 1
- Egypt 1
- Eritrea 1
- Ethiopia 1
- India 1
- Iraq 1
- Pakistan 1
- Syria 1
