You are here
Home › Revocation of protection status ›EDAL case summaries
The French National Court on Asylum (CNDA) based its reasoning on the CJEU jurisprudence according to which the Article 14 of the Directive 2011/95/EU transposed in Article L.711-6 CESEDA, allows revocation of refugee status, but does not imply that the refugee protection ceases. The international refugee protection under the Article 1 (A) (2) of the Geneva Convention continues to be applicable to the Applicant.
Member States are required to revoke subsidiary protection on the basis of art. 19(1), if they find out that the conditions that led to the granting of status were never met, regardless of whether the incorrect assessment of facts leading to the status is imputable exclusively to the national authority itself
The complainant, a Somali Citizen and a Sufi Muslim from Jaameel Sheen, Hiiraan Region, Somalia, had been detained and tortured by al-Shabaab due to teaching English.
Based on a consistent account in accordance with a medico-legal report from a torture investigation and country of origin information the Board found the applicant profiled in relation to al-Shabaab.
The applicant was granted subsidiary protection under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (2).
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...
The Secretary of State had appealed the decision of the FTT (supported by the Upper tribunal) on several grounds of error in law. The Court upheld the tribunal on the issue of whether they had considered the gravity of the respondent’s offences (section 72 of the 2002 Act); but found that the tribunals had indeed erred when considering the application of Article 1C(5) of the Refugee Convention, and on the applicability of Article 8 ECHR. They consequently remitted the case of MM’s deportation to the Upper Tribunal for re-examination in its entirety, based on these errors in the...
The applicant is an ethnic Somali and a Sunni Muslim belonging to the Bon Clan from Mesegawayn in the Galgaduud Region, Somalia. The applicant was originally in 2014 granted subsidiary protection by the Danish Immigration Service under the Danish Aliens Act Art. 7 (2). In February 2017, the Danish Immigration Service revoked the applicant’s subsidiary protection.
The account of the applicant regarding his original application was rejected by the Board due to a lack of credibility.
The majority of the Board found probable that the applicant’s daughter if returned to Somalia...
A renewed application for asylum in a second country is admissible if the nature of international protection applied for differs from the protection already granted. Deportation to the country of the first application or the country of origin is not to be taken into account in this situation.
The case examined the allegations of the applicant that his proposed expulsion to Turkey would place him at risk of inhuman and degrading treatment and would jeopardize his physical and health integrity.
The Court found no violation of the articles 2 and 3 of the Convention and held the claimed violations of articles 6 and 8 to be unfounded.
An Applicant who has been convicted of a serious crime is excluded from the right to claim protection. A life sentence with an undeterminable term does not constitute a temporary obstruction to deportation and therefore an Applicant cannot claim obstruction as grounds for leave to remain. Further, a family connection which has been examined by a criminal court as part of a final judgment cannot be re-examined as part of an asylum application.
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
Filter by applicable legal provisions
Filter by keywords
- (-) Remove Revocation of protection status filterRevocation of protection status
- Subsidiary Protection 15
- Circumstances ceased to exist 11
- Serious harm 10
- Exclusion from protection 8
- Refugee Status 8
- Cessation of protection 7
- Indiscriminate violence 6
- Real risk 6
- Internal armed conflict 5
- Standard of proof 5
- Torture 5
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 4
- Individual threat 4
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 4
- Non-refoulement 4
- Well-founded fear 4
- Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN 3
- Country of origin information 3
- Procedural guarantees 3
- Protection 3
- Serious non-political crime 3
- Terrorism 3
- Credibility assessment 2
- Crime against humanity 2
- Individual assessment 2
- Internal protection 2
- Previous persecution 2
- Relevant Facts 2
- War crimes 2
- Access to the labour market 1
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 1
- Armed conflict 1
- Burden of proof 1
- Child Specific Considerations 1
- Country of origin 1
- Detention 1
- Duty of applicant 1
- Family unity (right to) 1
- First country of asylum 1
- Gender Based Persecution 1
- Humanitarian considerations 1
- Inadmissible application 1
- International armed conflict 1
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 1
- Obligation to give reasons 1
- Persecution (acts of) 1
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 1
- Personal circumstances of applicant 1
- Political Opinion 1
- Refugee sur place 1
- Religion 1
- Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect) 1
- Safe country of origin 1
- Stateless person 1
- Withdrawal of protection application 1
Filter by country of applicant
- Turkey 8
- Afghanistan 6
- Iraq 6
- Somalia 6
- Russia 3
- Russia (Chechnya) 3
- Rwanda 2
- Albania 1
- Algeria 1
- Colombia 1
- Congo (DRC) 1
- Ivory Coast 1
- Kosovo 1
- Morocco 1
- Sri Lanka 1
- Sudan 1
- Syria 1
- Zimbabwe 1