You are here
Home › Detention ›EDAL case summaries
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan, Iran
Keywords: Accommodation centre, Detention, Inadmissible application, Material reception conditions, Reception conditions, Return, Safe third country, Subsequent application
1. A change of the destination country in a return decision by an administrative authority should be regarded as a new return decision requiring an effective remedy in compliance with Article 47 CFREU.
2. The national legislation providing for a safe transit country ground applicable in the present case is contrary to EU law.
3. The obligation imposed on a third-country national to remain permanently in a closed and limited transit zone, within which their movement is limited and monitored, and which the latter cannot...
Date: 14-05-2020
Country of Applicant: Russia (Chechnya)
Keywords: Best interest of the child, Child Specific Considerations, Detention, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Vulnerable person
The detention of children is, in principle, permitted under Article 5 ECHR for the shortest amount of time, in appropriate conditions and facilities, and only after the Government has correctly concluded that less coercive measures are unavailable.
The complaint of the applicants under Article 3 are manifestly unfounded.
Date: 26-03-2020
Country of Applicant: Iraq, Palestinian Territory, Somalia, Syria
Keywords: Detention, Material reception conditions, Procedural guarantees, Reception conditions, Return
Confinement of asylum applicants in an airport transit zone is contrary to Art. 5 § 1 (f) in the absence of any domestic legal basis for the applicants’ deprivation of liberty.
Confinement of asylum seekers left to their own devices in airport transit zones under the control of border authorities, without unimpeded access to shower or cooking facilities, outdoor exercise and medical or social assistance amount to degrading and inhuman conditions under Art. 3 ECHR if protracted for a long time.
Date: 21-11-2019
Country of Applicant: Bangladesh
Keywords: Accelerated procedure, Detention, Effective access to procedures, Effective remedy (right to), Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Procedural guarantees, Safe third country
When State Parties do not examine an application for international protection in its mertis based on a safe third country clause, Article 3 still requires that they apply a thorough and comprehensive legal procedure to assess the existence of such risk by looking into updated sources regarding the situation in the receiving third country. Hungary violated Article 3 by failing to conduct an efficient and adequate assessment when applying the safe third country clause for Serbia.
Article 5 cannot be considered as ratione materiae...
Date: 21-11-2019
Country of Applicant: Syria
Keywords: Delay, Detention, Return, Safe third country
Detention within the context of immigration must be lawful, not arbitrary and carried out in good faith. In this sense, the depriavation of liberty without a realistic prospect of removal is against the prevision of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention.
Date: 25-06-2019
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Detention, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Material reception conditions, Reception conditions, Torture, Unaccompanied minor, Vulnerable person
Conditions in police stations do not justify prolonged detention, while the child’s extreme vulnerability should prevail over irregular status with necessary measures adopted to protect them. Domestic authorities had not done all that could reasonably expected to fulfil their obligation in light of their vulnerability.
The authorities violated Article 5 by automatically applying the protective custody regime, without considering any alternatives to detention or the requirement under EU law to avoid the detention of children.
Date: 13-06-2019
Country of Applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Accommodation centre, Best interest of the child, Child Specific Considerations, Detention, Family reunification, Health (right to), Material reception conditions, Reception conditions, Unaccompanied minor, Vulnerable person
Detention conditions in Greek police stations and living conditions in Idomeni Camp in northern Greece for five unaccompanied children were in breach of Article 3 of the Convention. A further violation was found in respect of Article 5 § 1 regarding the “protective custody” of unaccompanied children in police stations.
Date: 13-06-2019
Country of Decision: Italy
Country of Applicant: Ghana, Sudan
Keywords: Detention, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Non-refoulement, Real risk, Safe third country, Torture
The Court recognised self-defence in a case where migrants were charged with assault against a police officer following their rescue at sea and their impending return to Libya. Their well-founded fear of return to Libya provided the basis for their defence of duress.
Date: 23-05-2019
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Detention, Return, Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect)
Detention in police stations, places that by their very nature are designed to accommodate people for very short durations, may amount to degrading and inhuman conditions under Art. 3 ECHR if protracted for a long time.
Detention of a person with a view to deportation is contrary to Art. 5 § 1 (f) if unlawful under the Convention or domestic law.
Date: 26-03-2019
Country of Decision: Cyprus
Country of Applicant: Georgia
Keywords: Delay, Detention, Effective access to procedures
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.
Date: 24-01-2019
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
- ECrtHR Case law 117
- National Case law 90
- CJEU Case law 14
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Detention filterDetention
- Effective remedy (right to) 84
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 77
- Return 59
- Effective access to procedures 53
- Refugee Status 40
- Dublin Transfer 38
- Procedural guarantees 36
- Reception conditions 36
- Material reception conditions 21
- Real risk 21
- Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect) 18
- Delay 17
- Vulnerable person 17
- Well-founded fear 17
- Best interest of the child 16
- Non-refoulement 14
- Accelerated procedure 13
- Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid 13
- Responsibility for examining application 13
- Torture 13
- Unaccompanied minor 12
- Health (right to) 11
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 11
- Safe third country 11
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 10
- Request to take back 10
- Child Specific Considerations 9
- Individual assessment 9
- Political Opinion 9
- Access to the labour market 8
- Obligation to give reasons 8
- Persecution (acts of) 8
- Subsequent application 8
- Accommodation centre 7
- Burden of proof 7
- Country of origin 7
- Relevant Facts 7
- Country of origin information 6
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 6
- Personal circumstances of applicant 6
- Relevant Documentation 6
- Safe country of origin 6
- Terrorism 6
- Final decision 5
- Indirect refoulement 5
- Personal interview 5
- Race 5
- Credibility assessment 4
- Discrimination 4
- Freedom of movement (right to) 4
- Inadmissible application 4
- Nationality 4
- Obligation/Duty to cooperate 4
- Religion 4
- Standard of proof 4
- Subsidiary Protection 4
- Duty of applicant 3
- Family member 3
- Family reunification 3
- Family unity (right to) 3
- First country of asylum 3
- Humanitarian considerations 3
- Previous persecution 3
- Protection 3
- Request that charge be taken 3
- Serious harm 2
- Sexual orientation 2
- Trafficking in human beings 2
- Withdrawal of protection application 2
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 1
- Armed conflict 1
- Benefit of doubt 1
- Crime against humanity 1
- Death penalty / Execution 1
- Dependant (Dependent person) 1
- Exclusion from protection 1
- Female genital mutilation 1
- Indiscriminate violence 1
- Individual threat 1
- Integration measures 1
- Internal armed conflict 1
- Manifestly unfounded application 1
- Membership of a particular social group 1
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 1
- Residence document 1
- Revocation of protection status 1
- Visa 1
Filter by date
Filter by country of applicant
- Iran 24
- Afghanistan 23
- Iraq 18
- Syria 15
- Turkey 13
- Russia 11
- Somalia 9
- Algeria 8
- Pakistan 7
- Sudan 7
- Morocco 6
- Unknown 6
- Uzbekistan 6
- Georgia 5
- Palestinian Territory 5
- Sri Lanka 5
- Congo (DRC) 4
- Ghana 4
- Tunisia 4
- Albania 3
- Armenia 3
- Bangladesh 3
- Cameroon 3
- Egypt 3
- Ivory Coast 3
- Kyrgyzstan 3
- Lebanon 3
- Nigeria 3
- Russia (Chechnya) 3
- Bulgaria 2
- Eritrea 2
- France 2
- Gambia 2
- Tajikistan 2
- Vietnam 2
- Angola 1
- Austria 1
- Bosnia and Herzegovina 1
- China 1
- Dominican Republic 1
- Guinea 1
- India 1
- Indonesia 1
- Jamaica 1
- Jordan 1
- Kazakhstan 1
- Kenya 1
- Kosovo 1
- Libya 1
- Sierra Leone 1
- Slovakia 1
- Tanzania 1
- United Kingdom 1
- United States 1
- Zimbabwe 1
Filter by country of decision
- United Kingdom 17
- France 10
- Netherlands 10
- Austria 8
- Greece 8
- Cyprus 5
- Czech Republic 5
- Poland 5
- Italy 4
- Switzerland 4
- Germany 3
- Slovenia 3
- Belgium 2
- Hungary 2
- Ireland 1
- Luxembourg 1
- Slovakia 1
- Sweden 1
