Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Reset
UK - The Queen on the application of MS, NA, SG - and - The Secretary of State for the Home Department, [2015] EWHC 1095, 22 April 2015
Country of applicant: Afghanistan, Eritrea, Sudan
Keywords: First country of asylum, Humanitarian considerations, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Safe third country, Real risk, Reception conditions, Responsibility for examining application, Request that charge be taken, Dublin Transfer, Accommodation centre, Integration measures, Request to take back, Return, Vulnerable person

The presumption that Italy remains in compliance with its EU and International Law obligations related to the reception and integration of asylum seekers and Beneficiaries of International Protection has not been rebutted. Asylum seekers and BIPs suffering from severe psychological trauma can be returned to Italy with no real risk of breaching article 3 ECHR, or 4 CFREU, since the Country's reception capacities have not been exceeded, while effective medical treatment is available under the same terms as to Italian nationals.

Date of decision: 22-04-2015
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 26,Art 28,Art 29,Art 30,European Union Law,Council of Europe Instruments,EN - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,Article 4,Art 33,EN - Reception Conditions Directive, Directive 2003/9/EC of 27 January 2003,Article 2,Article 13,Article 15,Article 17,Article 20,EN - Dublin II Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003,Article 3,1.,2.,EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 3
Austria – Asylum Court, 16 January 2012, S22 423.415-1/2011-3E
Country of applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Family unity (right to), Reception conditions, Dublin Transfer, Health (right to), Vulnerable person

The Asylum Court rejected an appeal against the decision to expel the applicant, who has a medical condition, and her daughter to Italy. The situation in Italy was assumed to be in accordance with the Reception Conditions Directive and there was, therefore, no real risk of a violation of Art 3 ECHR. There was no violation of Art 8 ECHR as the applicant’s son had been living in Austria for 10 years, which meant there was no family life worth protecting.

Date of decision: 16-01-2012
Relevant International and European Legislation: Article 13,Article 15,Article 17,Article 15,Article 16,EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 3,Article 8
Austria – Asylum Court, 6 December 2011, S16 422.756-1/2011-5E; S16 422.757-1/2011-5E; S16 422.758-1/2011-5E; S16 422.759-1/2011-5E; S16 422.760-1/2011-5E
Country of applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Reception conditions, Dublin Transfer, Health (right to), Vulnerable person

The Asylum Court allowed an appeal against the decision to transfer the applicants, a family with both physical and psychological medical conditions, to Italy. Given the applicants’ exceptional circumstances and the problems Italy has with capacity, the lack of reliable assurances from the Italian authorities in relation to medical treatment and accommodation gave rise to a risk of a violation of Art 3 ECHR.

Date of decision: 06-12-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: Article 13,Article 15,Article 17,2.,1.,Article 20,Article 3
UK - Supreme Court, 28 July 2010, R (on the application of ZO (Somalia) and others (Respondents) v Secretary of State for the Home department ( (Appellant) [2010] UKSC 36"
Country of applicant: Myanmar, Somalia
Keywords: Subsequent application, Access to the labour market

This case concerned whether the provisions of the Reception Conditions Directive apply to subsequent asylum applications (fresh claims) as with initial claims for asylum. It was confirmed that that the provisions do apply. 

Date of decision: 28-07-2010
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Asylum Procedures Directive, Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005,Art 2,Art 23.4 (h),Art 32,Art 34,Recital 15,Art 7.2,Art 24.1,Art 39.1 (c),EN - Reception Conditions Directive, Directive 2003/9/EC of 27 January 2003,Article 6,Article 8,Article 10,1.,2.,2.,1.,Article 16,1.
Austria - Constitutional Court, 6 March 2008, B2400/07 - B2418/07
Country of applicant: Russia (Chechnya)
Keywords: Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Procedural guarantees, Family unity (right to), Reception conditions, Dublin Transfer, Health (right to), Vulnerable person

A decision to expel an applicant with post-traumatic stress disorder to Poland did not violate Art 3 ECHR. The Member States guarantee, in accordance with Art 15 of the Reception Conditions Directive, to provide asylum applicants with the necessary medical treatment. Only in very exceptional cases does an expulsion violate Art 3 ECHR, even less frequently in cases of expulsions under the Dublin II regulation.

Date of decision: 06-03-2008
Relevant International and European Legislation: Article 15,2.,Article 10,Article 3,Article 8