Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Reset
UK - VT (Article 22 Procedures Directive - confidentiality), 19 July 2017
Country of applicant: Sri Lanka

The Tribunal reasserted the decision maker’s duty of confidentiality in considering documents produced in support of a protection claim. Where there is a needed to make an inquiry in the country of origin then written consent must be given by the applicant. Moreover, Article 22 of the Asylum Procedures Directive prohibits direct contact with the alleged actor of persecution. Additionally, the Refugee Convention requires that the authentication of a document is undertaken with a precautionary approach, namely whether an inquiry is necessary or should be framed in a specific manner and whether there is a safer alternative. Ultimately, disclosure of personal information should go no further than is strictly necessary.

The Tribunal found that the respondent was unlikely to have breached confidentiality in her inquiries into the authenticity of the documents produced; and that if she had, the remedy would not be the grant of refugee status; and that the appellant had not established that he had a credible case for asylum on the basis of the documents submitted. Nonetheless the Tribunal highlighted that a failure to comply with the duty of confidentiality might be relevant to the overall assessment of risk on return. 

Date of decision: 19-07-2017
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,EN - Asylum Procedures Directive, Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005,European Union Law,International Law,EN - Recast Asylum Procedures Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council,Art 22,EN - Reception Conditions Directive, Directive 2003/9/EC of 27 January 2003
UK – F v M and A (a child) and Secretary of State for the Home Department Joint Counsel for the Welfare of Immigrants (Interested Party), Case No: FD15P00103, 26/04/2017
Country of applicant: Pakistan

Following the careful examination of International, European and domestic law, the Court concluded that the grant of refugee status supersedes any order made by a Family Court (regarding the return of the child to Pakistan), because it is the Secretary of State for the Home Department  that is the entrusted public authority to deal with asylum matters.  However, were the Family Court to discover new facts, the relevant public authority would be responsible, in principle, under the tenets of UK Administrative Law to review their decision. 

Date of decision: 26-04-2017
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,EN - Asylum Procedures Directive, Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005,Art 2,Art 18,Art 24,Art 12,Art 17,Art 15,Art 4,Art 4,Art 8,Art 13,Art 14,Art 10,Art 12,Art 14,Art 1,Art 1A,Art 32,Art 21,Art 33,Art 13,Art 37,Art 38,Art 7,Recital 12,Art 22,Art 41,Article 3,Article 8
France - National Asylum Court, 4 May 2012, M.B., No. 11004519
Country of applicant: Turkey

Where national authorities responsible for examining asylum applications breach the duty of confidentiality, this can of itself create conditions exposing an asylum seeker to persecution within the meaning of the 1951 Refugee Convention.

Date of decision: 04-05-2012
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 1A (2),Art 22
Italy - Catania Court, 28 January 2010, No. RG 6176/2009
Country of applicant: Ivory Coast

For the purposes of access to legal cover for persons applying for international protection, documents issued by the Italian police certifying a person’s identity (residence permit) should be considered as being valid and wholly sufficient to identify the foreigner and, in consequence, to provide legal aid at the State’s expense, regardless of the precise particulars in the country of origin.

Date of decision: 28-01-2010
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 39,Art 22