You are here

Home › Accelerated procedure › Effective remedy (right to) › Request to take back ›

EDAL case summaries

UK - Esmaiel Mohammed Pour (1), Seid Jafar Hasini Hersari (2), Majid Ghulami (3) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department

Country of Decision: United Kingdom
Country of Applicant: Iran
Keywords: Accelerated procedure, Access to the labour market, Detention, Dublin Transfer, Effective access to procedures, Effective remedy (right to), Final decision, Health (right to), Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid, Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports, Non-refoulement, Obligation to give reasons, Procedural guarantees, Request to take back, Return, Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect), Safe third country, Standard of proof, Subsequent application

The case concerns three unconnected Iranian nationals who unsuccessfully claimed asylum in the Republic of Cyprus then came to the UK where they made asylum claims.  A further right to appeal remained with the Cypriot Supreme Court.  The case is a challenge by the applicants to the SSHD’s refusal to decide their asylum claims substantively; certification of their asylum claims on safe third country grounds; and certification of their human rights claims as clearly unfounded.

The Court concluded that there was no real risk that the...
Date: 01-03-2016

Belgium - Council for Alien Litigation, 17 February 2011, No. 56203

Country of Decision: Belgium
Country of Applicant: Russia
Keywords: Inadmissible application, Accelerated procedure, Assessment of facts and circumstances, Dublin Transfer, Request to take back, Responsibility for examining application, Effective access to procedures, Effective remedy (right to), Procedural guarantees, Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect), Detention

With this judgment, the General Assembly of CALL is trying to bring its case law in line with the M.S.S. judgment of the ECtHR.

The CALL set the conditions under which an appeal for suspension against an enforceable decision (an order to leave the territory) has automatic suspensive effect.

After a prima facie examination (in extreme urgency), the CALL decided that the applicant in this casehas a reasonable ground of appeal on the basis of Article 3 of the ECHR, as he gave sufficient indications of the concrete problems he was experiencing in Poland. The CALL derived...
Date: 17-02-2011

Filter by case summary type

Filter by applicable legal provisions

Filter by date

Filter by country of applicant

Filter by country of decision