Case summaries

  • My search
  • Keywords
    1
Reset
UK - Upper Tribunal, 20 June 2011, MT (Ahmadi - HJ (Iran)) Pakistan [2011] UKUT 00277 (IAC)
Country of applicant: Pakistan

The guidance in HJ (Iran) (see separate summary in this database) should be applied, by analogy, in cases where the applicant feared persecution on account of their religion. Consequently, the Tribunal had to consider the reason why an Ahmadi applicant for asylum had modified his behaviour by preaching only to people who would not put him at risk of persecution.

Date of decision: 20-06-2011
Belgium – Council for Alien Law Litigation, 9 June 2011, Nr. 62.867
Country of applicant: Niger
This case concerned the assessment of the risk of being subjected to slavery on return. The CALL held that slavery is sufficiently grave by its nature to constitute persecution. The Court further added that the prohibition of slavery is an absolute and non-derogable right and that slaves can be considered as a particular social group.
Date of decision: 09-06-2011
Germany - High Administrative Court Sachsen-Anhalt, 25 May 2011, 3 L 374/09
Country of applicant: Syria

A stateless Kurd from Syria was not recognised as a refugee. The court held:

  1. The denial of re-entry of stateless Kurds is not to be considered political persecution because a general institutional practice cannot be detected which is aimed against ethnic Kurds in a manner that is relevant to asylum grounds (Art 10 of the Qualification Directive).
  2. Whether the legal practice of Syrian legislation on citizenship and the denial of re-entry are part of a restrictive policy towards Kurds, and support the aims of the State of Syria in respect of its settlement policy, is not important when determining political persecution under Section 60 (1) sentence (5) of the Residence Act in connection with Art. 9 and 10 Qualification Directive.
Date of decision: 25-05-2011
Ireland - High Court, 8 April 2011, M.A.M.A. v Refugee Appeals Tribunal [2011] IEHC 147
Country of applicant: Sudan

A claim based on past persecution was rejected on the basis that it lacked credibility. A challenge to the decision of the Tribunal was successful on the basis that the decision did not contain any reasoned assessment of the prospective risk of future persecution if returned to Sudan. The High Court in its judgment cautioned against the use of case law as a source of country of origin information.

Date of decision: 08-04-2011
UK - Court of Appeal, 22 March 2011, DS (Afghanistan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2011] EWCA Civ 305
Country of applicant: Afghanistan

The Court of Appeal concluded that the Tribunal must make a best interest of the child determination in considering an asylum appeal made by an unaccompanied minor. Further, that although the Secretary of State has a duty to trace the applicant’s family under the Reception Conditions Directive, this duty exists independently of the obligation to appropriately consider an asylum claim. Therefore the Secretary of State’s failure to act on the basis of the duty is not a ground on which an asylum appeal could be allowed.  

Date of decision: 22-03-2011
Germany - Administrative Court Stuttgart, 14 March 2011, A 11 K 553/10
Country of applicant: Iran

Rights violations resulting from a forced marriage, including the use of physical and mental violence, constitute severe violations of basic human rights in terms of Art 9.1 (a) of the Qualification Directive.

The Iranian state is neither able nor willing to protect women against persecution by relatives in case of forced marriage.

Date of decision: 14-03-2011
Austria - Asylum Court, 24 February 2011, A4 213316-0/2008
Country of applicant: Egypt

An Egyptian transgender woman, who first underwent gender reassignment surgery and hormone treatment in Austria, was recognised as a refugee as it was accepted that there were problems with the police,  a refusal to issue her a passport using her new personal data and social issues of an intensity relevant to asylum matters.

Date of decision: 24-02-2011
Czech Republic - Supreme Administrative Court, 25 January 2011, R.S. v Ministry of Interior, 6 Azs 36/2010-274
Country of applicant: Kyrgyzstan

According to the Qualification Directive, forced marriage, along with domestic violence and issues of faith, can be considered as persecution on a cumulative basis having regard to the situation in the country of origin.

Date of decision: 25-01-2011
UK - Court of Appeal, 18 November 2010, RT (Zimbabwe) & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWCA Civ 1285
Country of applicant: Zimbabwe

The rationale of the decision in HJ (Iran) (see separate summary in this database) applies to cases concerning political opinion. Consequently an individual cannot be expected to modify their political beliefs or deny their opinion in order to avoid persecution. The situation in Zimbabwe was exceptional. At that time, the country guidance held that those who were unable to demonstrate their loyalty to the regime were at risk of persecution. Thus, those with no political beliefs could not be required to profess their loyalty to the regime to avoid persecution and were entitled to refugee status.

Date of decision: 18-11-2010
Ireland - High Court, 12 November 2010, A. v Minister for Justice [2010] IEHC 519
Country of applicant: Nigeria

The applicant in this case claimed to fear persecution in Nigeria on account of his sexuality. A decision to affirm a deportation order against him was quashed on the basis that insufficient assessment was given to whether the applicant’s human rights would be infringed by the behaviour required of him in order to avoid persecution. The thrust of the refugee and subsidiary protection decisions in the case, and of the deportation decision, was that the applicant could hide his homosexuality and not therefore expose himself to persecution, prosecution or serious harm.  

Date of decision: 12-11-2010