Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Reset
Greece - Attica Regional Asylum Office, 24 October 2013, GT [2013] Application No. 95/000186182
Country of applicant: Syria

The Applicant's claims that he would be in danger in Syria because of the civil war there were accepted, because he was a Christian and is considered an enemy by both sides and because he left his country illegally and applied for international protection. The Applicant's fear of being killed as a non-combatant in the civil war was considered to be well-founded. It was considered that there was a reasonable chance that he would be arrested and mistreated since the Syrian state would perceive him to have political beliefs since he had lived abroad and would be considered to be opposed to the regime. Internal relocation of the Applicant was not possible because if the Applicant were to return to any region of Syria he would be at risk of suffering serious harm because of the indiscriminate violence and also because the actor of persecution was national/governmental. The Applicant was recognised as a refugee.

Date of decision: 24-10-2013
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 1A (2),EN - Asylum Procedures Directive, Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005,Art 33,Para 38,Para 41,Para 42,Para 39,Para 40,Para 51,Para 43
Hungary - Metropolitan Court, 11 July 2013, M.A.A. v Office of Immigration and Nationality (OIN), 6.K.31830/2013/6
Country of applicant: Syria

It must be noted that the Applicant’s occupation as a pharmacist meant that according to the country of origin information, he could be a target group for the country`s security forces if they suspected that assistance was being provided to the insurgents. This was considered to constitute the Applicant`s imputed political opinion to be taken into consideration in light of the right to asylum, in other words, circumstances to be considered pursuant to the Geneva Convention.

Date of decision: 11-07-2013
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 10,Art 4,Art 1A,Art 9.1,Para 41,Para 42,Para 53,Para 43
Hungary - Metropolitan Court, 17 January 2012, M.A.A. v Office of Immigration and Nationality (OIN), 6.K.34663/2009/36
Country of applicant: Syria

The Syrian Kurdish Applicant has been persecuted and tortured for his nationality and imputed political opinion.

Date of decision: 17-01-2012
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 10,Art 4,Art 1A,Art 9.1,Para 43,Article 3
Y.P. and L.P. v. France, No. 32476/06, 2 September 2010
Country of applicant: Belarus

Expulsion by France of two nationals of Belarus whose asylum claims had been rejected would amount to a violation of Article 3. 

Date of decision: 02-09-2010
Relevant International and European Legislation: UNHCR Handbook,Para 43,EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 1,Article 2,Article 3,Article 6,Article 8,Article 13,Article 14,Recital (27),Article 4,Article 5,Article 9,Article 10
Germany - Administrative Court Köln, 12 October 2007, 18 K 6334/05.A
Country of applicant: Iraq

Currently every Sunnite and Shiite from Central and South Iraq is to be considered as a refugee within the meaning of Section 60 (1) Residence Act and the 1951 Refugee Convention, if he/she originates from a region with mixed denominations.

Returnees who originate from regions of mixed denominations cannot obtain internal protection in any part of Iraq.

Date of decision: 12-10-2007
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 8,Art 4.3,Art 7,Art 9,Art 10.1 (d),Art 10,Art 4,Art 6,Art 4.4,Art 1A,UNHCR Handbook,Para 38,Para 37,Para 41,Para 42,Para 39,Para 40,Art 2 (c),Para 44,Para 43,EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 3,Article 4,Article 5,Article 7,Article 8,Article 9,Article 11,Article 12,Article 15
Poland - Supreme Administrative Court in Warsaw, 4 June 2002, V SA 2817/01
Country of applicant: Russia

When assessing an application for refugee status, what is important is whether the acts of persecution were carried out for the reasons identified in the Geneva Convention, and not whether or to what extent the victim of persecution can be identified with those reasons.

Fear of persecution within the meaning of Article 1A(2) of the Geneva Convention need not mean that persecution is certain or even probable. Recognition of refugee status is already justified where there are reasonable grounds for asserting the possibility of persecution. “Possibility” means that persecution may take place although it is neither certain nor probable, and the “reasonable grounds” requirement indicates the need to establish real and objective evidence of the risk of persecution. The plausibility of the threat is shown by the situation in the country of origin of the person applying for refugee status as well as that person’s experience to date.

Date of decision: 04-06-2002
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 1A (2),Art 8,Art 2,Art 9,Art 10,Art 23,Art 1F,Para 41,Para 43