Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Reset
ECtHR - B.Ü. v. the Czech Republic, Application No. 9264/15, 06/10/2022
Country of applicant: Turkey
Keywords: Burden of proof, Detention, Effective remedy (right to), Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports, Standard of proof, Protection, Torture, Well-founded fear, Return, Health (right to), Vulnerable person

Complaint under Article 3 ECHR concerning the conditions of detention of a Turkish national in the Czech Bělá-Jezová detention centre declared inadmissible for non-exhaustion of domestic remedies. Failure to conduct an independent, thorough and victim-accessible investigation into allegations of police ill-treatment at Prague Airport amounts to a violation of the procedural aspect of Article 3 ECHR. Alleged ill-treatment by police officers does not amount to a violation of the substantive aspect of Article 3 ECHR, as the ECtHR cannot establish beyond reasonable doubt that the force used, including pepper spray, was excessive.

Date of decision: 06-10-2022
Relevant International and European Legislation: Article 1,Article 4,Article 18,Art 19.2,Article 35,Article 47,Article 6,Article 8,Article 12,Article 13,Article 14,Article 24,Article 26,Article 46,Article 5,Article 6,Article 8,Article 9,1.,1. (a),1. (b),2.,2. (a),2. (b),3.,4.,5.,6.,6. (a),6. (b),1.,2.,3.,4.,5.,Article 3,Article 13,Article 14,Article 34,Article 35,Article 41,Article 44,Art 5.1 (a),Art 5.1 (b),Art 5.1 (c),Art 5.1 (d),Art 5.1 (e),Art 5.1 (f),Art 5.2,Art 5.3,Art 5.4,Art 5.5,Art 8.1,Art 8.2,Article 3,Article 18,Article 28,Article 8,Article 9,Article 10,Article 11,Article 19,Article 21,Article 22
CJEU - C-718/19, Ordre des barreaux francophones et germanophone and Others v Conseil des ministers
Country of applicant: Belgium
Keywords: Detention, Freedom of movement (right to), Return

The Court decides that the maximum period of detention for the purpose of removal of a person on the grounds of public policy or public security under Belgian law, according to which Union citizens and their family members are treated in the same way as third-country nationals subject to a return procedure, exceeds the principle of proportionality and thus does not comply with EU law.

Date of decision: 22-06-2021
Relevant International and European Legislation: Recital (2),Recital (4),Recital (24),Article 2,Article 6,Article 7,1.,1. (a),1. (b),2.,2. (a),2. (b),3.,4.,5.,6.,6. (a),6. (b),1.,2.,3.,4.,5.,1.,2.,3.,4.,5.,Article 18,Art 45.1,Art 45.2,Art 4
ECtHR - Muhammad Saqawat v. Belgium, Application no. 54962/18, 2020
Country of applicant: Bangladesh
Keywords: Effective access to procedures, Detention, Effective remedy (right to)

The situation in which an appeal by a foreigner against a detention decision is declared ‘without object’, solely on the ground that a new detention order has been issued, does not offer the guarantees of effectiveness and promptness required by article 5 §4 of the Convention. 

Date of decision: 30-09-2020
Relevant International and European Legislation: Recital (1),Recital (2),Recital (3),Recital (4),Recital (5),Recital (6),Recital (7),Recital (8),Recital (9),Recital (10),Recital (11),Recital (12),Recital (13),Recital (14),Recital (15),Recital (16),Recital (17),Recital (18),Recital (19),Recital (20),Recital (21),Recital (22),Recital (23),Recital (24),Recital (25),Recital (26),Recital (27),Recital (28),Recital (29),Recital (30),Article 1,Article 2,Article 3,Article 4,Article 5,Article 6,Article 7,Article 8,Article 9,1.,2.,Article 11,Article 12,Article 13,Article 14,1.,1. (a),1. (b),2.,2. (a),2. (b),3.,4.,5.,6.,6. (a),6. (b),1.,2.,3.,4.,5.,1.,2.,3.,4.,5.,Article 18,Article 19,Article 20,Article 21,Article 22,Article 23,Art 5.1 (f),Art 5.4,Article 8
European Court of Human Rights, A.A. v. Switzerland, 5 November 2019, n°32218/17
Country of applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Burden of proof, Credibility assessment, Individual assessment, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Non-refoulement, Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Personal circumstances of applicant, Refugee sur place, Country of origin, Religion, Membership of a particular social group, Real risk, Death penalty / Execution, Return

When a national authority assesses the likely persecution of an applicant for religious purposes in case of return to his/her country of origin, the national authority must evaluate, inter allia, the way the applicant will live his/her faith in his/her country of origin. The Court found that because the applicant is of Hazara ethnic origin and he converted to Christianism in Switzerland, he might face persecution in violation of art. 3 ECHR in case of return to Afghanistan. The TAF did not assess with enough seriousness the consequences of the applicant conversion ex nunc.

Date of decision: 05-11-2019
Relevant International and European Legislation: Article 3,1.,1. (a),1. (b),2.,2. (a),2. (b),3.,4.,5.,6.,6. (a),6. (b),1.,2.,3.,4.,5.,Article 3,Article 35,Article 41,Article 43,Article 44,Article 4,Article 5,Article 9,Article 10
France, Court of Appeal of Douai, 19 February 2019, X v. Prefect of Pas de Calais, No RG19/00334
Country of applicant: Sudan
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Detention, Individual assessment, Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports, Previous persecution, Personal circumstances of applicant, Gender Based Persecution, Return, Vulnerable person

A medical examination to assess vulnerability was requested by an applicant in administrative detention. This demand was not examined by the doctor in charge in the detention facility. Therefore, the court of appeal refused an extension of the applicant’s administration detention and ordered their release. 

Date of decision: 19-02-2019
Relevant International and European Legislation: Article 3,1.,1. (a),1. (b),2.,2. (a),2. (b),3.,4.,5.,6.,6. (a),6. (b),1.,2.,3.,4.,5.