Case summaries
For the exclusion ground of war crimes or crimes against humanity to be applicable it is not necessary to establish to the point of utmost certainty that a refugee has committed such crimes, it is sufficient if serious reasons justify this assumption. A revocation of refugee status is also possible if war crimes or crimes against humanity have been committed after refugee status was granted.
The situation which prevails today in some geographical areas of Somalia, in particular in and around Mogadishu, must be seen as a situation of generalised violence resulting from a situation of internal armed conflict, in the meaning of Article L.712-1 c) Ceseda [which transposes Article 15 (c) of the Qualification Directive].
The applicant came from a district in Afghanistan, which according to up-to-date country of origin information, also contained areas judged as being safe. When considering internal protection for subsidiary forms of international protection, the decision maker must also consider whether or not the applicant is able to reach these areas safely. The roads could not be considered safe and the other presented routes were also not considered feasible for the applicant. As the applicant could not resort to internal protection elsewhere, he was granted a residence permit on the grounds of humanitarian protection in accordance with section 88 a § of the Aliens’ Act.
The expulsion of relatives providing care can breach Art. 8 ECHR, particularly if the foreigner requiring care and who is resident here is not removed from the country himself, but only the relative providing care.
The High Court refused leave to apply for judicial review of a deportation order on the grounds that the decision of the Minister for Justice was reasonable.
The case refers to an appeal before the High National Court brought by the Appellant against the decision of the Central Court for Contentious-Administrative Proceedings to uphold the Ministry of the Interior’s denial of asylum.
The Appellant is a Nigerian national.In the application she claimed that when her father died, she was left in debt to the chief of the tribe to which they belonged.In order to settle the debt, the Applicant was forced to marry the tribal chief and was kept as a prisoner.
Therefore, the High National Court upheld the Applicant’s appeal as it deemed the situation suffered by women in Nigeria, and particularly forced marriage, constitutes a form of persecution for membership of a particular social group.
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.
The Helsinki Administrative Court held that the applicant was not considered at risk of persecution as it was unlikely that the Iranian authorities were aware of the applicant’s extramarital affair and the applicant was able to rely on her friends for support in different parts of Iran.
The Helsinki Administrative Court held that the applicant was not considered at risk of persecution as it was unlikely that the Iranian authorities were aware of the applicant’s extramarital affair and the applicant was able to rely on her friends for support in different parts of Iran.
The Court found that the province of Ghazni, Afghanistan was still unstable and unsafe for the local population due to the presence of an internal armed conflict. However the security situation in Kabul had not deteriorated to the extent to be classified as an internal armed conflict.