Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Reset
Portugal - Administrative Litigation Section of the Central Administrative Court, 11/02/2016, proc. nº 12873/16
Country of applicant: Syria

It is an appeal against the decision handed down by the Administrative Court of Lisboa that granted asylum to a Syrian citizen.

The recursive claim was declared unfounded by the Central Court, inter alia because the applicant’s mere transit from Brazil could not be considered as a connecting link that could render Brazil a safe third country.

Date of decision: 11-02-2016
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,EN - Asylum Procedures Directive, Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005,Para 203,Para 204,Para 196,EN - Recast Asylum Procedures Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council,EN - Reception Conditions Directive, Directive 2003/9/EC of 27 January 2003,EN - Recast Qualification Directive, Directive 2011/95/EU of 13 December 2011,EN - Recast Reception Conditions Directive, Directive 2013/33/EU of 26 June 2013
Sweden - Migration Court of Appeal, 25 October 2012, UM287-10, MIG 2012:14
Country of applicant: Iraq

An Iraqi man, previously a member of the Ba'ath Party, was granted refugee status. There were not found to be any grounds for exclusion. The man's son was also granted refugee status, with reference to the principle of family unity.

Date of decision: 25-10-2012
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 12.2,Art 12.3,Art 1F,Para 184,Para 185,Para 155,Para 152,Para 203,Para 204,Para 147,Para 149,Para 162,Para 163,Para 156,Para 157,Para 150,Para 151,Para 153,Para 154,Para 158,Para 159,Para 160,Para 161,Para 143,Para 186
Ireland - High Court, 31 July 2012, B.J.C. (South Africa) v the Refugee Appeals Tribunal, the Refugee Applications Commissioner and the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform [2012] IEHC 340
Country of applicant: South Africa

The Court granted permission to the Applicant to seek judicial review of the negative decision made in a written appeal (rather than an oral appeal) in an application for refugee status made by a South African national. The decision to allow a written appeal was based on the status of South Africa as a ‘safe country,’ but because the appeal decision was based on personal credibility, the absence of an oral hearing may have been unlawful by reference to the right to an effective remedy as guaranteed by the Asylum Procedures Directive.

Date of decision: 31-07-2012
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 8,Art 4,Art 39,Art 31,Para 203,Para 204
Czech Republic - Supreme Administrative Court, 30 September 2008, S.N. v Ministry of Interior, 5 Azs 66/2008-70
Country of applicant: Kazakhstan

This case concerned an appeal against the refusal of international protection to an Imam from Kazakhstan who claimed persecution from state actors because of his religion. The Ministry of Interior (MOI) and the Regional Court considered that persecution had not been established, and that the behaviour of the authorities had not been motivated by the applicant’s religious belief of “pure Islam” (this is a term that is used to distinguish themselves from other Muslims). However, the Supreme Administrative Court (SAC) disagreed and found that due to the specific circumstances of the applicant (an Imam) there was a risk of persecution. The Court also stated that refugee status can involve risk that is motivated by more than one reason, so long as one of those reasons is a persecution ground.

Date of decision: 30-09-2008
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 1A (2),Art 2 (e),Art 4.3,Art 9,Art 4.4,Art 4.5,Art 33,Art 9.2 (b),Art 9.2 (c),UNHCR Handbook,Para 195,Para 200,Para 201,Para 202,Para 203,Para 204,Para 196,Para 197,Para 198,Para 199
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
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 4,UNHCR Handbook,Para 195,Para 200,Para 201,Para 202,Para 203,Para 204,Para 196,Para 197,Para 198,Para 199,Para 205