Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Reset
Ireland - High Court, 15 April 2011, R. v Refugee Appeals Tribunal and Minister for Justice Equality and Law Reform [2011] IEHC 151
Country of applicant: Belarus

This case concerned reliance upon demeanour in refusing a refugee application. Then Court found that an asylum decision maker must be careful not to misplace reliance upon demeanour and risk construing as deliberate lack of candour from a demeanour which may be the result of nervousness, of the stress of the occasion and even of the embarrassment of being an asylum seeker.

Date of decision: 15-04-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 4.2,Art 4.3,Art 5,Art 4,Art 5.1
Finland - Supreme Administrative Court, 8 April 2011, KHO:2011:1012
Country of applicant: Afghanistan

The Supreme Administrative Court (SAC) returned the case to the Administrative Court for reconsideration based on the applicants' change of circumstance (conversion to Christianity in Finland) which only became apparent during the appeal before the SAC.

Date of decision: 08-04-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 7,Art 5,Art 9.3,Art 10.1 (b),Art 4.3 (d),EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 3
Finland - Helsinki Administrative Court, 7 April 2011, 11/0425/3
Country of applicant: Afghanistan

The Administrative Court did not consider credible the claim that the applicant’s conversion to Christianity had come to the attention of the Afghan authorities. The Court held that even if this information had reached the authorities, the applicant would not be at risk on return.

Date of decision: 07-04-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 5,Art 4,Art 10.1 (b),Art 10.2
Germany - Adminstrative Court Trier, 23 March 2011, 5 K 1181/10.TR
Country of applicant: China

A mother of two children was recognised as a refugee as there was sufficient probability of her being forced to undergo sterilisation in China due to violation of the one child policy. Forced sterilisation constitutes a violation of the basic human right to physical integrity and human dignity to such an extent that it is without doubt relevant under Section 60 (1) of the Residence Act. / Art 1 A 2 of the 1951 Refugee Convention.

Date of decision: 23-03-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 9,Art 10.1 (d),Art 5,Art 6 (c),Art 6 (a)
Sweden - Migration Court, 1 March 2011, UM 20938-10
Country of applicant: China

This case concerned a Chinese applicant of Uyghur ethnicity who was granted residence and refugee status because of his sur place political activities in Sweden.

Date of decision: 01-03-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 10.1 (e),Art 5
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
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 4.3,Art 7,Art 10,Art 5,Art 6,Art 4.4,Art 12.2
Ireland - High Court, 21 January 2011, H.M. v Minister for Justice, Equality, Law Reform, [2011] IEHC 16
Country of applicant: Afghanistan

The case involves analysis of Art 5 of the Qualification directive. The applicant converted to Christianity in Ireland.

The Court stated that when analysing the behaviour of an applicant in the country of asylum, in this case conversion to Christianity, the issue is how such behaviour would be considered in the country of origin. Also, that while the state is entitled to view some claims based on sur place activities with a heightened degree of scepticism, the question involves whether, objectively, the applicant has a well-founded fear of persecution.

The Court granted leave to the applicant for judicial review of the decision of the Minister for Justice to issue a deportation order.

Date of decision: 21-01-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 4.3 (d),Art 5.1,Art 5.2,EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 3
Sweden - Migration Court of Appeal, 30 November 2011, UM 7850-10
Country of applicant: Afghanistan

For conversion to be considered an acceptable protection ground the religious belief must be genuine.

Converts to Christianity in Afghanistan face a general risk of persecution and inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment on return. However, the Migration Court of Appeal found that an Afghan applicant did not prove it was reasonably likely that his conversion from Islam to Christianity was founded on a genuine belief. He had not shown that if he returned to his country of origin he had the intention to live as a convert. There was also no evidence that the authorities in his country of origin knew that he had converted.

Date of decision: 30-11-2010
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 5,Art 4,Art 3,Art 1A,UNHCR Handbook,Para 196,Art 5.2,Para 71,Para 72,Para 73,EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 3
Finland - Helsinki Administrative Court, 25 Oct 2010, 10/1389/1
Country of applicant: Iran

Subsidiary protection was granted on grounds that the applicant, from Iran, could be at risk inhuman or degrading treatment. The applicant based his asylum claim on the political activities of his brother in his country of asylum, as well as his own participation in protests in Iran. The Court found that after having spent two years in Finland as an asylum seeker it was likely that the applicant would be of special interest to the Iranian authorities.

Date of decision: 25-10-2010
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 15,Art 5,Art 21
Poland - Regional Administrative Court in Warsaw, 19 August 2010, V SA/Wa 243/10

A well-founded fear of persecution may also be based on events that took place after the Applicant left his country of origin (refugee sur place). Sur place evidence refers to circumstances which arose after the Applicant left his country of origin and which are as a rule connected with a change in the situation in the country of origin, but one cannot exclude other events which are closely linked with the person applying for refugee status and which occurred after he left his country of origin.

Date of decision: 19-08-2010
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 1A (2),Art 2,Art 9,Art 10,Art 5,Art 6,Art 23