You are here
Home ›EDAL case summaries
National authorities are best placed to assess the credibility of asylum claimants.
The ill-treatment of people of non-Arab ethnic origin in Sudan is not systematic. Therefore, when the personal circumstances of an applicant that may create a risk of persecution are insufficiently substantiated, the applicant’s removal to Sudan will not give rise to a violation of Article 3 of the Convention.
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...
Not all cases with an international element can establish jurisdiction under the Convention; an assessment of exceptional circumstances on the basis of the specific facts of each case is required.
The applicants do not have any connecting links with Belgium and their sole presence in the premises of the Belgian Embassy in Lebanon cannot establish jurisdiction, as they were never under the de facto control of Belgian diplomatic or consular agents. Jurisdiction under Article 1 ECHR cannot be established solely on the basis of an administrative...
In the case of an Afghan Shia Hazara applicant, the Belgian Council for Alien Litigation considered that the request for international protection was based on several sources of fear, which must be analysed in combination with each other, forming a cluster of concordant evidence.
The Council granted the applicant refugee status.
The fact that an asylum seeker has already been persecuted in the past or has been subject to direct threats of persecution, was considered as a well-founded argument to believe that the applicant would face the risk to be persecuted under Article 1, Section A §2 of the 1951 Refugee Convention.
The High Court has issued a judgment following an application for an interim order. The matter concerns the accommodation of asylum-seekers who display Covid-19 symptoms, who bears the responsibility for accommodating asylum-seekers who are symptomatic, and the communication of policy and practice in this area.
Member States cannot merely refer to the existence of public order and security concerns under Article 72 TFEU, in order to derogate from their obligations under Title V without proving that it was necessary to do so. Such a derogation cannot be made unilaterally without any control by the European institutions. As the assessment of whether an applicant constitutes a danger to national security or public order should be thorough and individualised, in accordance with previous findings in C‑369/17 (Ahmed), Member States cannot invoke this provision in the context of...
Well-grounded information is of central importance to any decision to exclude a person convicted for criminal matters from international protection in accordance with Article 1 F of the 1951 Refugee Convention.
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.
The standardised nature of the questions to the applicants and similarities in the responses recorded do not necessarily indicate a lack of individualised assessment. The applicants were not deprived of an opportunity to submit arguments against their expulsion and did not make any claim of persecution risks in their country of origin. No collective expulsion under Article 4 Protocol 4 has been established.
Similarly, no violation of Article 4 Protocol 4 in conjunction with Article 13 has been established, as the claim cannot be considered...
Pages
Languages
Filter by case summary type
- National Case law 1391
- ECrtHR Case law 248
- CJEU Case law 118
Filter by applicable legal provisions
- European Union Law 1370
- Council of Europe Instruments 686
- International Law 531
- UNHCR Handbook 102
Filter by keywords
- Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment 270
- Subsidiary Protection 249
- Effective remedy (right to) 246
- Detention 235
- Dublin Transfer 225
- Assessment of facts and circumstances 222
- Refugee Status 221
- Persecution Grounds/Reasons 216
- Credibility assessment 208
- Procedural guarantees 201
- Effective access to procedures 182
- Membership of a particular social group 162
- Country of origin information 157
- Return 156
- Internal protection 154
- Persecution (acts of) 121
- Well-founded fear 121
- Real risk 120
- Responsibility for examining application 119
- Family unity (right to) 117
- Individual assessment 115
- Reception conditions 113
- Personal circumstances of applicant 112
- Political Opinion 101
- Non-refoulement 100
- Burden of proof 96
- Serious harm 96
- Exclusion from protection 94
- Best interest of the child 88
- Subsequent application 87
- Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect) 85
- Vulnerable person 85
- Protection 81
- Actor of persecution or serious harm 79
- Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports 78
- Child Specific Considerations 77
- Non-state actors/agents of persecution 77
- Standard of proof 77
- Unaccompanied minor 75
- Internal armed conflict 73
- Gender Based Persecution 71
- Material reception conditions 71
- Relevant Documentation 71
- Religion 71
- Family member 70
- Indiscriminate violence 70
- Torture 68
- Relevant Facts 67
- Family reunification 66
- Safe third country 65
- Individual threat 63
- Humanitarian considerations 61
- Request to take back 61
- Personal interview 60
- Country of origin 56
- Previous persecution 56
- Discrimination 55
- Actors of protection 53
- Obligation to give reasons 49
- Sexual orientation 48
- Accelerated procedure 47
- Delay 47
- Refugee sur place 46
- Inadmissible application 45
- Legal assistance / Legal representation / Legal aid 44
- Armed conflict 42
- Health (right to) 42
- Revocation of protection status 41
- First country of asylum 39
- Terrorism 39
- Benefit of doubt 37
- Request that charge be taken 37
- Manifestly unfounded application 34
- Access to the labour market 32
- Accommodation centre 31
- Nationality 31
- Safe country of origin 31
- Crime against humanity 29
- Dependant (Dependent person) 29
- Duty of applicant 28
- Residence document 27
- Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN 26
- Race 25
- Visa 25
- Circumstances ceased to exist 23
- Final decision 23
- Serious non-political crime 23
- Freedom of movement (right to) 21
- Obligation/Duty to cooperate 21
- Stateless person 21
- Trafficking in human beings 19
- Cessation of protection 18
- Integration measures 18
- War crimes 17
- Indirect refoulement 16
- Female genital mutilation 15
- More favourable provisions 11
- Country of former habitual residence 10
- International armed conflict 10
- Death penalty / Execution 9
- Education (right to) 8
- Sponsor 8
- Withdrawal of protection application 8
- Temporary protection 4
- Genocide 3
Filter by date
Filter by country of applicant
- Afghanistan 211
- Iraq 121
- Iran 102
- Russia 92
- Syria 91
- Nigeria 85
- Somalia 83
- Turkey 60
- Unknown 57
- Pakistan 44
- Eritrea 41
- Russia (Chechnya) 41
- Algeria 37
- Sudan 37
- Congo (DRC) 36
- Sri Lanka 34
- Kosovo 27
- Palestinian Territory 24
- Morocco 23
- Ukraine 22
- Cameroon 20
- Guinea 19
- Ivory Coast 19
- Armenia 18
- Albania 17
- Ethiopia 16
- Rwanda 16
- Lebanon 15
- Bangladesh 14
- China 14
- Georgia 14
- Colombia 13
- Gambia 13
- Ghana 13
- Tunisia 13
- Egypt 12
- Serbia 12
- Senegal 11
- Uzbekistan 10
- Bosnia and Herzegovina 9
- Mali 9
- Sierra Leone 9
- Belarus 8
- India 8
- Kyrgyzstan 8
- Angola 7
- Mongolia 7
- Uganda 7
- Vietnam 7
- Azerbaijan 6
- France 6
- Kazakhstan 6
- Libya 6
- South Africa 6
- Togo 6
- United Kingdom 6
- Zimbabwe 6
- Burundi 5
- Croatia 5
- Mauritania 5
- Tanzania 5
- Bulgaria 4
- Jordan 4
- Kenya 4
- Lithuania 4
- Moldova 4
- United States 4
- Western Sahara 4
- Brazil 3
- China (Tibet) 3
- Cuba 3
- Germany 3
- Liberia 3
- Macedonia 3
- Benin 2
- Bhutan 2
- Botswana 2
- Chad 2
- Congo (Republic of) 2
- Cyprus 2
- Haiti 2
- Israel 2
- Kuwait 2
- Myanmar 2
- Niger 2
- North Korea 2
- Saudi Arabia 2
- Slovakia 2
- South Korea 2
- Tajikistan 2
- Austria 1
- Burkina Faso 1
- Central African Republic 1
- Comoros 1
- Czech Republic 1
- Djibouti 1
- Dominican Republic 1
- Ecuador 1
- Gabon 1
- Greece 1
- Guinea-Bissau 1
- Indonesia 1
- Italy 1
- Jamaica 1
- Madagascar 1
- Malawi 1
- Montenegro 1
- Namibia 1
- Nepal 1
- New Zealand 1
- Philippines 1
- Poland 1
- Romania 1
- Thailand 1
- Venezuela 1
- Zambia 1
Filter by country of decision
- France 177
- Germany 155
- United Kingdom 149
- Austria 89
- Ireland 88
- Belgium 84
- Sweden 74
- Netherlands 60
- Greece 59
- Spain 59
- Czech Republic 58
- Poland 58
- Italy 52
- Hungary 47
- Finland 42
- Slovenia 35
- Slovakia 30
- Denmark 25
- Luxembourg 16
- Switzerland 16
- Portugal 10
- Cyprus 7