You are here
Home › Credibility assessment ›EDAL case summaries
Country of Decision: Italy
Country of Applicant: Iraq
Keywords: Credibility assessment, Effective access to procedures, Effective remedy (right to), Inadmissible application
In the absence of EU rules concerning the procedural requirements with regard to the submission and examination of an application for international protection, Member States must determine those requirements provided that they do not render in practice impossible or excessively difficult the exercise of the right to seek asylum.
Date: 18-09-2018
Country of Decision: Austria
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Child Specific Considerations, Credibility assessment, Individual assessment, Internal protection, Obligation to give reasons, Protection, Return, Safe country of origin, Serious harm, Subsidiary Protection, Vulnerable person
The judicial examination of whether subsidiary protection shall be approved requires a thorough assessment of the individual case. This applies in particular for especially vulnerable persons.
Date: 21-03-2018
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Credibility assessment, Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports, Membership of a particular social group, Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Sexual orientation
National authorities can order experts’ reports with the purpose of assisting in the assessment of the facts and circumstances relating to a declared sexual orientation of an applicant, provided that the procedures for these reports are consistent with fundamental rights. However, the examining authority, courts or tribunal must not base their decision solely on the conclusions of an expert’s report and are not bound by these conclusions when assessing the applicant’s statements relating to his or her sexual orientation.
Moreover, national...
Date: 25-01-2018
Country of Applicant: Sierra Leone
Keywords: Credibility assessment, Discrimination, Individual assessment, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Manifestly unfounded application, Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Refugee Status, Safe country of origin, Sexual orientation
The applicant, a national from Sierra Leone who claimed asylum in Switzerland on the grounds of persecution owing to his homosexuality, is found not to be at risk of treatment prohibited under Article 3 of the Convention in case of return to his country of origin. In substance, the Court recalls that national authorities are in the best position to carry out this risk assessment and recalls the UNHCR Guiding Principles on asylum claims based on sexual orientation, which require the evaluation of the risk through individual assessment, in addition to the examination of the country’s...
Date: 18-01-2018
Country of Applicant: Iraq
Keywords: Child Specific Considerations, Credibility assessment, Detention, Effective remedy (right to), Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
The ECtHR reviewed if the detention of a family with three children in a border police’s detention facility would be considered as a breach of Article 3 ECHR.
Date: 07-12-2017
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: United Kingdom
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Credibility assessment, Religion
The court gave guidance on the application of a structured approach to credibility assessment.
Date: 22-11-2017
Country of Decision: Switzerland
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Country of origin information, Credibility assessment, Internal protection, Personal circumstances of applicant
Kabul cannot be considered as a reasonable internal flight alternative for the complainant due to the lack of a sustainable social network for him there and no other particular factors which would enable the applicant's removal . Therefore the complainant does not meet the requirements for a removal to Afghanistan.
Date: 13-10-2017
Country of Decision: United Kingdom
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Country of origin information, Credibility assessment, Membership of a particular social group, Political Opinion, Religion, Well-founded fear
The appellant claimed that the Tribunals in their determinations had failed to give adequate reasons for their conclusions, in particular that the appellant had not demonstrated well-founded fear. The Court considered the grounds for this claim and found that since we should ‘avoid a requirement of perfection’ (para 26) they were not sufficient to establish that the tribunals had erred, nor that the claimant was at risk of persecution.
Date: 12-10-2017
Country of Applicant: Senegal
Keywords: Country of origin, Credibility assessment, Manifestly unfounded application, Sexual orientation, Well-founded fear
The ECtHR declared inadmissible the complaints brought by a Senegalese national who had unsuccessfully applied for asylum in Spain due to his fear of being persecuted in his country of origin on the grounds of his sexual orientation. The complaints were considered premature since the Audiencia Nacional had annulled the administrative decision rejecting his asylum application and the asylum procedure had started afresh.
Date: 26-09-2017
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Credibility assessment filterCredibility assessment
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 58
- Country of origin information 49
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 45
- Subsidiary Protection 43
- Membership of a particular social group 40
- Internal protection 35
- Well-founded fear 32
- Burden of proof 30
- Refugee Status 30
- Relevant Documentation 25
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 24
- Real risk 24
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 23
- Persecution (acts of) 23
- Standard of proof 22
- Religion 20
- Benefit of doubt 19
- Personal circumstances of applicant 19
- Procedural guarantees 19
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 18
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 18
- Political Opinion 18
- Individual assessment 17
- Previous persecution 17
- Child Specific Considerations 16
- Effective remedy (right to) 16
- Gender Based Persecution 16
- Obligation to give reasons 16
- Sexual orientation 15
- Country of origin 14
- Relevant Facts 14
- Serious harm 14
- Individual threat 13
- Personal interview 13
- Torture 13
- Protection 12
- Indiscriminate violence 10
- Refugee sur place 10
- Unaccompanied minor 10
- Duty of applicant 9
- Non-refoulement 9
- Effective access to procedures 8
- Internal armed conflict 8
- Actors of protection 7
- Vulnerable person 7
- Accelerated procedure 6
- Armed conflict 6
- Discrimination 6
- Humanitarian considerations 6
- Safe country of origin 6
- Subsequent application 6
- Best interest of the child 5
- Manifestly unfounded application 5
- Return 5
- Detention 4
- Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid 4
- Obligation/Duty to cooperate 4
- Safe third country 4
- Accommodation centre 3
- Exclusion from protection 3
- Family member 3
- Female genital mutilation 3
- Nationality 3
- Trafficking in human beings 3
- Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN 2
- Death penalty / Execution 2
- Delay 2
- Dependant (Dependent person) 2
- Dublin Transfer 2
- Family reunification 2
- Final decision 2
- First country of asylum 2
- Inadmissible application 2
- Race 2
- Revocation of protection status 2
- Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect) 2
- Access to the labour market 1
- Country of former habitual residence 1
- Crime against humanity 1
- Family unity (right to) 1
- Reception conditions 1
- Responsibility for examining application 1
- Serious non-political crime 1
- War crimes 1
Filter by date
Filter by country of applicant
- Iran 24
- Afghanistan 22
- Somalia 22
- Iraq 16
- Nigeria 12
- Russia 8
- Congo (DRC) 7
- Sudan 6
- Syria 6
- Gambia 5
- Pakistan 4
- Rwanda 4
- Sri Lanka 4
- Bangladesh 3
- Cameroon 3
- Colombia 3
- Guinea 3
- Albania 2
- Algeria 2
- Belarus 2
- China 2
- Eritrea 2
- Libya 2
- Sierra Leone 2
- South Africa 2
- Turkey 2
- Uganda 2
- Angola 1
- Bosnia and Herzegovina 1
- Burkina Faso 1
- Burundi 1
- Central African Republic 1
- Egypt 1
- Ethiopia 1
- Gabon 1
- Ghana 1
- Ivory Coast 1
- Kazakhstan 1
- Kenya 1
- Kosovo 1
- Kuwait 1
- Lebanon 1
- Mauritania 1
- Mongolia 1
- Nepal 1
- Niger 1
- Russia (Chechnya) 1
- Senegal 1
- Tanzania 1
- Unknown 1
- Uzbekistan 1
- Zimbabwe 1
Filter by country of decision
- Ireland 31
- United Kingdom 17
- Belgium 16
- Sweden 15
- Hungary 13
- Greece 12
- Austria 9
- Germany 7
- Netherlands 6
- Denmark 5
- Finland 5
- Italy 5
- Spain 5
- Poland 4
- Slovakia 4
- Switzerland 4
- Czech Republic 3
- Slovenia 3
- France 2
- Luxembourg 1
