Journal

Summary land border expulsions in front of the ECtHR: ND and NT v Spain

Date: 
Wednesday, October 25, 2017

This journal contribution is to be read in conjunction with the EDAL case summary on ND and NT v Spain.

Introduction :

When ND and NT submitted their application to the European Court of Human Rights in February 2015, the latest Grand Chamber judgment on collective expulsions was Hirsi Jamaa and others v Italy...

Hotspots under a spotlight: the legality of the hotspot approach in Italy

Date: 
Monday, June 26, 2017

Introduction

Constituting an iconic flagship of the European Agenda on Migration, Hotspots are the tool designed by the European Commission to prevent the “inflow” of migrants who arrive to Italy and Greece. 

According to ...

Equality of arms? Use of classified information in return cases in Poland

Date: 
Wednesday, April 26, 2017

Introduction

Return decisions should generally include factually based information on why the decision is being issued. However, under the Return Directive justification of the decision can be limited for reasons of national security (Article 12(1) second sentence). The information contained in such a decision is often provided by the intelligence services of the state and therefore protected by the law. The problem arises when factually based information is not...

Detention of asylum-seekers under the scope of Article 5(1)(f) of ECHR - some thoughts based on recent ECHR and CJEU jurisprudence

Date: 
Wednesday, September 14, 2016

Introduction

The deprivation of liberty is only authorised under the ECHR if it pursues a specific objective defined in subparagraphs (a)-(f) of Article 5(1). Detention of irregular migrants, as well as asylum seekers usually falls under subparagraph (f), which has two limbs: to prevent unauthorised entry or when action is being taken with the view to deportation. Under EU law Article 8(3) of the

...

The right to an effective remedy in asylum proceedings in Poland

Date: 
Tuesday, August 30, 2016

Introduction

In Poland cases concerning international protection are examined by the Head of the Office for Foreigners and the appeals are handled by the administrative authority called the Refugee Board. The decisions of the Refugee Board can be appealed to the Voivodeship Administrative Court in Warsaw. Its judgements can be subject to cassation proceedings conducted by the Supreme Administrative Court. In this system with two authorities carrying out administrative proceedings and two administrative courts, separate from common courts, which appeal should be...

Prolonging detention under the Return Directive in Poland

Date: 
Friday, October 9, 2015

Introduction

Article 15 of Directive 2008/115/EC on the returns of irregular migrants has been subject to numerous preliminary references before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Interpretative guidance has been given by the CJEU on how the period of pre-removal detention should be calculated as well as the grounds for extending detention under the Directive and the judicial control of a decision...

Tarakhel v. Switzerland: Where does the Dublin system stand now?

Date: 
Thursday, December 4, 2014

This article is to be read in conjunction with the EDAL case summary

Introduction

On the 4th November the Grand Chamber provided its much anticipated judgment in Tarakhel v. Switzerland (no. 29217/12). The Court’s judgment, concerning the proposed return of a family to Italy under the Dublin Regulation, had been awaited with bated breath given a divide between domestic and European jurisprudence on whether return to Italy...

The Dublin system and the Right to an Effective Remedy– The case of C-394/12 Abdullahi

Date: 
Friday, December 13, 2013

This article is to be read in conjunction with the EDAL case summary.

Introduction

On 10 December 2013 the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued a preliminary reference ruling in case C-394/12 Abdullahi concerning the scope of Dublin appeals in situations where a Member State has agreed to take charge of an applicant for asylum under Art. 10(1)...