Case summaries

  • My search
  • Country of applicant
    1
Reset
Austria - Administrative Court (VwGH), 24 March 2011, 2008/23/1134
Country of applicant: Georgia

The expulsion of relatives providing care can breach Art. 8 ECHR, particularly if the foreigner requiring care and who is resident here is not removed from the country himself, but only the relative providing care.

Date of decision: 24-03-2011
France – Council of State, 24 December 2010, Mr A, No 345199
Country of applicant: Georgia

This was an appeal against the decision to transfer an asylum applicant to Poland. The Council of State rejected the applicant’s claim that he was not informed about the Dublin procedure in a language intelligible to him, as the applicant had indicated he understood Russian and an interpreter had been provided. Moreover, the circumstances necessary to apply Art 3(2) Dublin Regulation had not been met.

Date of decision: 24-12-2010
France – Council of State, 20 October 2009, Mr. & Mrs. A, No 332631
Country of applicant: Georgia

In this case the Council of State had to determine whether the Reception Conditions Directive continues to apply to asylum applicants that are subject to procedures under the Dublin Regulation. The Council found Member States are bound by the obligations in the Directive until the handling of the applicant’s case or the transfer to the Responsible Member State is enforced.

Date of decision: 20-10-2009
ECtHR - Shamayev and Others v Georgia and Russia, Application no.36378/02, 12 October 2005
Country of applicant: Georgia, Russia, Russia (Chechnya)

Thirteen applicants from Georgia and Russia (of Chechen origin) alleged that their extradition to Russia, where capital punishment was not abolished, exposed them to the risk of death, torture or ill-treatment contrary to Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention. The applicants also alleged that they had been subject to violence and ill-treatment by fifteen members of the Georgian Ministry of Justice’s special forces in Tbilisi Prison no.5., on the night of 3 and 4 October 2002. Their legal representatives asserted that Mr Aziev, one of the extradited applicants, had died as a result of ill-treatment inflicted on him. The applicants also complained of violations of Article 2 and 3, Article 5 §§ 1, 2 and 4, Article 13 in conjunction with articles 2 and 3, Article 34, Articles 2, 3 and 6 §§ 1,2 and 3 and Article 38 § 1 of the Convention. 

Date of decision: 12-04-2005