Portugal - J v. Immigration and Borders Service, No. 263/18.5 BELSB, 11 July 2018

Article 615º (1) CPC (Civil Procedure Code) states the need for annulment of a decision when the decision-maker does not rule on matters which should be taken in consideration in that particular case. This only happens if the parties argue a particular circumstance which is intentionally not assessed by the decision-maker.

In this case the Immigration and Borders Service’s decision-making process did not take in consideration the applicant’s alleged health issues, namely his suffering from a severe mental disorder.

The Court ruled that the existence of such mental disorder should be confirmed, as well as its gravity. However, the Immigration and Borders Service did not consider as proven that the appellant suffers from a serious mental disorder, and did not conduct any probationary steps to establish the truth, even though that was explicitly demanded by the applicant. This contravenes Article 111º (1) of the CPTA (Administrative Courts’ Procedural Code).The Immigration and Borders Service should not have declared the applicant’s vulnerable condition as not proven without conducting any investigation on that the existence of such a condition.

Consequently, the Court ruled in favour of the annulment of the decision on the inadmissibility of the applicant’s request for international protection.

It further ruled that the case should be remitted back to the Central Administrative Court of Lisbon for the collection of evidence on the applicant’s vulnerability. If, according to medical reports, the applicant’s mental disorder ends up being confirmed, the Court will need to assess if his/her transfer to Germany exposes him/her to a risk of deterioration of his/her mental health, as well as if any precautions can be taken to avoid that. Otherwise, the transfer order to Germany will need to be suspended, considering the applicant’s special circumstances.