Case summaries

  • My search
  • Keywords
    1
Reset
Germany - Administrative Court Ansbach, 16. February 2017, AN 6 K 16.01533
Country of applicant: Afghanistan

Decision to authorise legal aid in a process which concerns whether the applicant has a right to access an integration course.

Date of decision: 16-02-2017
UK - R (on the application of Hassan and Another) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Dublin – Malta; Charter Art 18) IJR, 28 September 2016
Country of applicant: Sudan

The case concerned an application for judicial review of the decisions made on behalf of the Secretary of State to transfer the applicants to Malta, on the basis that such jurisdiction was the proper place for considering the applicants’ asylum claims. The applicants argued that such transfer would violate their rights under Article 18 of the Charter of the Fundamental Rights of the European Union (EU Charter) to have their asylum application determined within a reasonable time and on the basis of a fair procedure, as the Maltese asylum system had several shortcomings and contains procedures that are illusory or too slow. Dismissing the application, the Tribunal concluded that there was no evidence to support the argument that the applicants’ Article 18 rights would be violated if they were transferred to Malta. 

Date of decision: 28-09-2016
Belgium – Council of Alien Law Litigation, X / VIII, 25 August 2016, nr. 173 581
Country of applicant: Afghanistan

The transfer of asylum seekers from Belgium to Austria, under the Dublin Regulation, is contrary to the principle of due diligence, because the government has failed to obtain information on the effects of the moratorium of the processing of asylum applications in Austria.

Date of decision: 25-08-2016
France - Council of State, 8 June 2016, N°386558
Country of applicant: Sri Lanka

The lower court had erred in law by judging that the administration need not justify having informed the applicant about the possibility to communicate with a  representative of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).

Date of decision: 08-06-2016
UK - Esmaiel Mohammed Pour (1), Seid Jafar Hasini Hersari (2), Majid Ghulami (3) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department
Country of applicant: Iran

The case concerns three unconnected Iranian nationals who unsuccessfully claimed asylum in the Republic of Cyprus then came to the UK where they made asylum claims.  A further right to appeal remained with the Cypriot Supreme Court.  The case is a challenge by the applicants to the SSHD’s refusal to decide their asylum claims substantively; certification of their asylum claims on safe third country grounds; and certification of their human rights claims as clearly unfounded.

The Court concluded that there was no real risk that the applicants, if returned to Iran from Cyprus, would be refouled there and the inclusion of Cyprus on the list of safe third countries involves no incompatibility with the ECHR.  The Court was wholly unpersuaded that there was any flagrant breach of Article 5 in Cyprus for Dublin returnees who have had a final decision on their claim.

Date of decision: 01-03-2016
ECtHR - H.A v Greece, Application no. 58424/11, 21 January 2016
Country of applicant: Iran

In light of the Court’s previous jurisprudence relating to the conditions at Soufli detention centre, the Greek government has violated Article 3 ECHR on account of overpopulation and poor hygiene conditions, has violated Article 5 § 1 ECHR by not taking steps to carry out the expulsion in the five months of the applicant’s detention and did not provide an effective judicial remedy to challenge his detention pending expulsion, in violation of Article 5 § 4 ECHR.

Date of decision: 21-01-2016
Belgium - Brussels Labour Tribunal, 7 December 2015, 2015/3098
Country of applicant: Afghanistan

The failure of Fedasil to accommodate an asylum seeking child led to a risk of violating his Article 3 rights. There was a prima facie case that he had lodged an application for asylum and was, thus, entitled to material reception conditions. 

Date of decision: 07-12-2015
Germany - Hannover Administrative Court, 5 November 2015, no. 10 A 5157/15
Country of applicant: Mali

The transfer of an applicant for asylum to Malta violates the Regulation (EU) no 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 (“Dublin III Regulation”) because Malta’s asylum procedures and system show systemic deficiencies with the inherent risk of subjecting an applicant for asylum to inhuman or degrading treatment.  

Date of decision: 05-11-2015
France - Administrative Tribunal of Lille, 2 November 2015, Association MEDECINS DU MONDE et al., No. 1508747

The Applicants asked the Administrative Tribunal of Lille (the “Tribunal”) to order the relevant authorities to take urgent interim relief measures to guarantee the fundamental freedoms of the population of the Calais camp.

The Administrative Judge  acceded to several of the applicants’ demands (identification of vulnerable minors, hygiene, cleanliness, emergency vehicle access) and held that the situation in the Calais camp constituted a grave and blatantly illegal breach of the right of the persons residing there not to be subjected to degrading and inhuman treatment.

Date of decision: 02-11-2015