Case summaries

  • My search
  • Keywords
    1
Reset
Belgium – Council for Alien Law litigation, 20 December 2007, Nr. 5.277
Country of applicant: Rwanda

In its assessment of real risk of serious harm the CALL took into consideration the psychological circumstances of the applicant. The CALL considered that the seriousness of the applicant’s past traumatic experiences (as a child soldier) had left such psychological marks on him that a future forced enrolment in the army would be psychologically unbearable for him and would, in his case, amount to inhuman and degrading treatment.

Date of decision: 20-12-2007
Greece - Council of State, 5 July 2007, 1628/2007

Application for annulment of a decision by the Minister of Public Order

 

This case concerned the interpretation of Presidential Decree 61/1999 in light of Directive 2004/83/EC andexamined the reasoning of the Administration's decision in an application for recognition as a refugee, in an appeal for annulment. The minutes of the Advisory Committee should cite not only the interested party's claims but also the content of the questions put by members of the Committee and the alien's responses, as well as a detailed assessment of the claims and of any documentation or other evidence which may have been submitted. There is an obligation on the members of the Committee to deliver a reasoned judgment on the credibility of the asylum seeker. 

Date of decision: 05-07-2007
Czech Republic - Supreme Administrative Court, 20 June 2007, R.K. v Ministry of Interior, 6 Azs 142/2006–58
Country of applicant: Russia, Russia (Chechnya)

This case examines the differences between the procedure for examining a claim for asylum and the procedure for examining the application of exclusion clauses.

Date of decision: 20-06-2007
Germany - High Administrative Court Baden-Württemberg, 25 October 2006, A 3 S 46/06
Country of applicant: Russia, Russia (Chechnya)

Members of a family, who are Russian citizens of Chechen ethnicity, who originate from Chechnya, can avail of internal protection (in the context of persecution by non-state actors, Section 60 (1) sentence (4) (c) of the Residence Act in conjunction with Art 8 of the Qualification Directive) in areas outside Chechnya, if one family member (in this instance the wife) possesses a new Russian internal passport, which is an important requirement for registration.

Date of decision: 25-10-2006
Sweden – Migration Court of Appeal, 18 September 2006, UM 122-06
Country of applicant: Egypt

The UNHCR Handbook is an important source of law concerning the procedure to determine protection needs. The Migration Court is responsible for ensuring that a case is sufficiently investigated by holding an oral hearing or otherwise investigating the ambiguities of the case, when an asylum seeker who has been rejected because of credibility grounds has submitted relevant documents that are deemed to be genuine by a Swedish embassy.

Date of decision: 18-09-2006
Czech Republic - Supreme Administrative Court, 24 February 2004, Y.A. v Ministry of Interior, 6 Azs 50/2003-89
Country of applicant: Iran

If any fact emerges during the interview, which indicates that the applicant could be persecuted for exercising his political rights and freedoms, or has a well-founded fear of being persecuted on the grounds upon which asylum can be granted, the Ministry of Interior obliged to conduct the interview in a way that would achieve an outcome which is sufficiently clear for the needs of considering the asylum claim. It is also necessary to evaluate the way in which state power is exercised in the country of origin, and the real possibility of exercising one’s political rights and other circumstances that could establish grounds for international protection.

Date of decision: 24-02-2004
UK - Immigration Appeal Tribunal, 19 February 2002, Tanveer Ahmed [2002] UKIAT 00439
Country of applicant: Pakistan
This decision established that the burden of demonstrating the reliability of documents adduced in an asylum case lay on the applicant.  Only when an allegation of forgery was made  and it was necessary to determine whether the documents were forged did the burden shift to the Home Office. In that case the standard was the balance of probabilities.
Date of decision: 19-02-2002