Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Reset
Belgium - Council for Alien Law Litigation, 30 May 2013, No. 103921
Country of applicant: Syria

The political activities carried out in Belgium by the Syrian Applicant justified granting him refugee status; he should not be confined to the subsidiary protection granted due to the indiscriminate violence generated by the armed conflict in Syria.

Date of decision: 30-05-2013
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 1A (2),Art 5,Art 5.2,Para 83,Para 95,Para 96
Belgium - Council for Alien Law Litigation, 30 May 2013, No. 103856
Country of applicant: Iraq

The Council for Alien Law Litigation confirmed that those who enjoy subsidiary protection are equivalent to recognised refugees, for the purposes of family reunification. This means that they are exempted from additional conditions in relation to housing, health insurance, and means of subsistence provided that the application for family reunification is submitted within one year and the family ties existed before the arrival in Belgium of the reuniting person (who enjoys subsidiary protection). This is despite the fact that those who enjoy subsidiary protection do not fall within the scope of application of the Family Reunification Directive.

Date of decision: 30-05-2013
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 24.2,Article 3,Article 7,1.
Hungary - Administrative and Labour Court of Budapest, 28 May 2013, S.A. v Office of Immigration and Nationality (OIN) 3.K.31404/2013/4
Country of applicant: Syria

The Court recognised the Applicant as a refugee because he would be at risk of persecution due to his political opinions upon returning to his home country.

Date of decision: 28-05-2013
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 10.1 (e),Art 5.1,Para 83,Art 5.3
Belgium - Council for Alien Law Litigation, 23 May 2013, Nr 103.509
Country of applicant: Lebanon

The Applicant had been forced to leave the UNRWA’s area of operations. The facts that had led to his departure from Lebanon justified ending his exclusion from the application of Article 1D of the Geneva Convention.

Date of decision: 23-05-2013
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 12,Art 1D
Hungary - Administrative and Labour Court of Budapest, 23 May 2013, S.M.A. v Office of Immigration and Nationality (OIN), 20.K.31072/2013/9
Country of applicant: Afghanistan

Rather than dismissing the application, the Court recognised the subsidiary protection status of the Applicant, as his/her return to the country of origin would lead to the risk of serious harm (inhuman, degrading treatment or indiscriminate violence).

Date of decision: 23-05-2013
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 15 (c),Art 15 (b)
Poland - Regional Administrative Court in Warsaw, 16 May 2013, IV SA/Wa 2684/12

A foreigner shall cease to be eligible for subsidiary protection when the circumstances which led to the granting of subsidiary protection status have ceased to exist or have changed to such a degree that protection is no longer required. The relevant provision refers to two separate reasons that justify revoking subsidiary protection. The first is that the circumstances which led to the granting of such protection have ceased to exist. The second is that those circumstances have changed, although the change of circumstances must be of such a significant and non-temporary nature that the foreigner no longer faces a real risk of serious harm.

Subsidiary protection cannot establish a right that is comparable to, for instance, the right to obtain permission for temporary stay or indefinite leave to remain.

Date of decision: 16-05-2013
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 2,Art 18,Art 23,Art 4,Art 16,Art 23,UNHCR Handbook
Belgium - Council for Alien Law Litigation, 2 May 2013, No. 102283
Country of applicant: Lebanon, Palestinian Territory

The Applicant falls within the scope of application of Article 1(D) of the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees. She was excluded from refugee status as she did not show that she left the area where she was receiving support from the UNRWA for reasons against her will.

Date of decision: 02-05-2013
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 12.1 (a),Art 1D
Greece - Athens Court of Appeal, 25 April 2013, Application No. 57/2013
Country of applicant: Turkey

Application from the Turkish Authorities to have the Greek Judicial Authorities issue an extradition notice against A.F., a Turkish citizen seeking asylum in Greece.

The Court ruled against the Turkish Authorities' extradition request, deciding that if the person in question were extradited to Turkey there would be a risk that her situation would be made worse because of her political beliefs and because of her pending application to have her refugee status recognised by the Greek state.

Date of decision: 25-04-2013
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 1A (2),EN - Asylum Procedures Directive, Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005,Art 33,Art 19.2,Article 3,Article 5,Article 6,Article 8,Article 14
Belgium - Council for Alien Law Litigation, 24 April 2013, No. 101488
Country of applicant: Senegal

The CALL ruled that the discrimination or ill treatment suffered by homosexuals in Senegal did not amount to all homosexuals of Senegalese origin having reason to fear persecution in Senegal on the sole basis of their sexual orientation.   

Date of decision: 24-04-2013
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 1A (2),Art 9,Art 10,Para 196
Greece - Appeal Committee of Vyronas, 23 April 2013, Application No. 4/1188365
Country of applicant: Ethiopia

This case concerned forced child labour in ther country of origin and sexual exploitation of the daughter of an Ethiopian father and an Eritrean mother, strained relations between the two countries, mass expulsions on the basis of ethnic origin, absence of a family network in the country of origin, total illiteracy, unequal treatment of single women, and an inability to integrate into society.

In relation to the absence of a family network, the case considered the stigma which may be suffered as a member of the particular social group of “single women in Ethiopia”.

Should she return to Ethiopia, it was considered likely that the Applicant would be totally ostracised to such an extent that she would be unable to integrate into society and enjoy her legal rights.

Date of decision: 23-04-2013
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 1A (2),EN - Asylum Procedures Directive, Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005,Art 33,Para 38,Para 41,Para 42,Para 39,Para 40,Para 51,Art 25.2,Art 25.3