Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Reset
Germany – Federal Administrative Court, 11 July 2018, BVerwG 1 C 18.17
Country of applicant: Afghanistan

The Federal Administrative Court has to clarify whether the petition for action directed solely at the obligation to decide on the asylum application is admissible. The question if it is also possible to directly oblige the defendant to grant international protection or to establish prohibitions on deportation by means of an action is not the subject of the decision. As a result, the court comes to the conclusion that there was a delay by the respondent of providing the decision on the asylum application without sufficient reason and that the plaintiff has a need for legal protection for its action for failure to act.

Date of decision: 11-07-2018
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 39.1,Art 4,Art 17,Recital 11,Art 2,Art 2 (e),Art 14.2,Art 13,Recital 13,Art 12.2,Article 47,Recital (18),Recital (25),Article 2,Article 4,Article 14,Article 15,Article 17,Article 31,Article 46,Article 51,Recital 10,Art 4.3,Art 12.4,Art 13.1,Art 13.2,Art 13.3,Art 17.4 (b),Art 23.2 (b),Article 4
Greece - Council of State, Decision no. 2347/2017, 22 September 2017
Country of applicant: Syria
Date of decision: 22-09-2017
Relevant International and European Legislation: Article 4,Article 18,Article 19,Article 46,Article 47,Article 52,Article 53,Article 14,Article 15,Article 17,Article 33,Article 35,Article 38,Article 4,Article 6,Article 7,Article 15,Article 21
CJEU - C‑348/16, Moussa Sacko
Country of applicant: Mali

If an application for protection has been heard at first instance and the applicant there had the opportunity of a full examination including a personal interview and was given a transcript or report of the interview; and if it was there determined that the application is manifestly unfounded; then EU asylum law in particular Directive 2013/32/EU allows the national court or tribunal to dismiss an appeal without allowing the applicant  a further opportunity to be heard.

However, a hearing may be conducted if the court hearing the appeal considers it necessary for the purpose of ensuring that there is a full and ex nunc examination of both facts and points of law, as required under Article 46(3) of the Directive.

Date of decision: 26-07-2017
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Asylum Procedures Directive, Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005,European Union Law,Council of Europe Instruments,EN - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,Article 47,EN - Recast Asylum Procedures Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council,Recital (18),Recital (20),Article 2,Article 12,Article 14,Article 17,Article 31,Article 32,Article 46,EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 6