Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Reset
Sweden - Migration Court of Appeal, 13 June 2011, UM 5495-10
Country of applicant: Iraq

Refugee status was revoked when an individual applied for and received a new passport issued by his/her country of origin.

Date of decision: 13-06-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 4.3 (e),Art 11,Art 14,UNHCR Handbook,Art 25,Para 118,Para 121,Para 124
Germany - Administrative Court Berlin, 9 June 2011, 33 K 285.10 A
Country of applicant: Afghanistan

It is in principle possible for men to be persecuted on account of their gender. However, classifying the punishment for extramarital sex in Afghanistan as persecution on account of both membership of the group of men and the group of women would cover the entire society and renders the definition meaningless. Therefore, the applicant was not granted refugee status but his deportation was prohibited under Section 60 (2) of the Residence Act / Art 15 (b) of the Qualification Directive.

Date of decision: 09-06-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 9.2,Art 10.1 (d),Art 10.1 (e),Art 9.3,Art 6 (c),Art 10.2,Art 9.1,Art 2 (c)
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
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 10.1 (d),EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 4,Article 15
Belgium – Council for Alien Law Litigation, 28 January 2009, Nr. 22.175
Country of applicant: Guinea

The Council for Alien Law Litigation (CALL) held that Art 48/5, §3 of the Belgian Aliens Law, which refers to the principles of internal protection alternative and protection within a country of origin, is in principle applicable in cases where the threat comes from a non-state agent. In a case where the threat of persecution comes from a state agent, the decision-maker should explain why it believes that this provision is applicable nonetheless.

Date of decision: 09-06-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 8,Art 4
Germany - Federal Administrative Court, 1 June 2011, 10 C 10.10
Country of applicant: Turkey

Following the decision of Abdulla et al. (C-175/08) of the European Court of Justice, revocation of refugee status presupposes that a significant and non-temporary change of circumstances has taken place. This is the case if the factors which formed the basis of the recognition of refugee status, may be regarded as having been permanently eradicated. The relevant standard of probability for the determination of the likelihood of future persecution is the same both for the recognition and the revocation of refugee status, i.e. a change in circumstances has to be assessed on the basis of whether there is still a "considerable" probability of persecution (change from former case law).

Date of decision: 01-06-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 7,Art 4.4,Art 11,Art 1C (5),Art 1C (6),Art 14.2
Slovakia - Constitutional Court, 31 May 2011, S.H.T., III.ÚS 110/2011-39
Country of applicant: Afghanistan

The Constitutional Court did not unreservedly uphold the judgment of the  Supreme Court. The Appellant in the case sought protection of his rights under Article 3 of the ECHR (and fundamental rights under Article 16(2) of the Constitution), which, in comparison with the other human rights and fundamental freedoms defined in the Convention, is characterised by an absolute and collective guarantee. In view of this, the Constitutional Court found that the standards of protection arising from Article 3 of the Convention (and Article 16(2) of the Constitution) should have been applied in the proceedings, even if such an obligation is not explicitly set out in the legislation, because these secure a greater range of constitutional rights and freedoms within the meaning of Article 154c(1) of the Constitution, and therefore take precedence over the law.

Date of decision: 31-05-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: 2.,Article 3,Article 15
Sweden - Migration Court of Appeal, 31 May 2011, UM 10190-10
Country of applicant: Uzbekistan

When protection grounds are invoked only after a decision on removal becomes final, these shall be deemed admissible. On any appeal, the  Migration Court or the Migration Court of Appeal cannot take into account such factors that could be the basis for granting a residence permit unless (for example, family links or humanitarian reasons) they are based on protection grounds. 

Date of decision: 31-05-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Asylum Procedures Directive, Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005,Art 3,Art 2,Art 1
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
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 15 (c),Art 10,Art 9.3,Art 4.3 (c),Art 9.1,Art 9.1 (a),Art 2 (c),EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 15
Netherlands - District Court Haarlem, 25 May 2011, AWB 10/44949
Country of applicant: Iran

Restriction of the right to attend church is an act of persecution and therefore a violation of Art 10 of the Qualification Directive.

Date of decision: 25-05-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 10,EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 3
Netherlands - District court Zwolle, 24 May 2011 , AWB 11/38687
Country of applicant: Iraq

Art 4:6 of the General Administrative Law Act, just as Art 32 of the Asylum Procedures Directive, requires not only that the claimed facts and circumstances of the subsequent application are new, but also that they are relevant and thus contribute to the likelihood that the applicant qualifies for an asylum residence permit.

Date of decision: 24-05-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Asylum Procedures Directive, Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005,Art 32