Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Reset
UK - Esmaiel Mohammed Pour (1), Seid Jafar Hasini Hersari (2), Majid Ghulami (3) v The Secretary of State for the Home Department
Country of applicant: Iran

The case concerns three unconnected Iranian nationals who unsuccessfully claimed asylum in the Republic of Cyprus then came to the UK where they made asylum claims.  A further right to appeal remained with the Cypriot Supreme Court.  The case is a challenge by the applicants to the SSHD’s refusal to decide their asylum claims substantively; certification of their asylum claims on safe third country grounds; and certification of their human rights claims as clearly unfounded.

The Court concluded that there was no real risk that the applicants, if returned to Iran from Cyprus, would be refouled there and the inclusion of Cyprus on the list of safe third countries involves no incompatibility with the ECHR.  The Court was wholly unpersuaded that there was any flagrant breach of Article 5 in Cyprus for Dublin returnees who have had a final decision on their claim.

Date of decision: 01-03-2016
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Asylum Procedures Directive, Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005,Art 39,Art 25,Art 15,Art 18,Art 32,Art 34,Art 39.1 (c),EN - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,Article 4,Article 6,Article 19,Art 19.2,Article 47,Article 52,EN - Recast Asylum Procedures Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council,Article 20,Article 21,Article 33,Article 40,Article 46,Art 15.2,Art 15.3 (b),Art 15.3 (d),Art 39.3,EN - Returns Directive, Directive 2008/115/EC of 16 December 2008,Article 13,Article 15,2.,Art 52.3,Article 2,Article 3,Article 4,Article 5,Article 6,Article 13,Art 5.1,Art 5.2,Art 5.3,Art 5.4,Art 5.5,Art 6.3,EN - Dublin III Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No. 604/2013 of 26 June 2013 (recast Dublin II Regulation),Article 23,EN - Recast Reception Conditions Directive, Directive 2013/33/EU of 26 June 2013,Article 8,Article 9
ECtHR – Musaev v. Turkey, Application No. 72754/11
Country of applicant: Uzbekistan

The European Court of Human Rights has held Turkey to be in violation of the applicant’s right to liberty as well as material reception conditions during his detention in Kumkapı Removal Centre. The Court further held that the applicant had not benefited from an effective remedy by which to complain of the detention conditions.

Date of decision: 21-10-2014
Relevant International and European Legislation: Article 3,Article 13,Art 5.1,Art 5.2,Art 5.4,Art 5.5
ECtHR – Dbouba v. Turkey, Application No. 15916/09, 13 October 2010
Country of applicant: Tunisia
The applicant, a Tunisian national who has been recognised as a refugee by the UNHCR, faced deportation by Turkey to Tunisia, where he risks ill-treatment and the death penalty. He has not had access to an effective remedy with regards to this, nor has he been allowed to challenge the lawfulness of his detention. By virtue of the applicant’s proposed return to Tunisia the Court found a violation of Article 3 ECHR in conjunction with Article 13. The Court also found a violation of articles 5(1), 5(2), 5(4) and 5(5) ECHR.
 
Date of decision: 13-10-2010
Relevant International and European Legislation: Article 3,Article 5,Article 13,Article 35,Article 41,Article 44,Art 5.1,Art 5.2,Art 5.4,Art 5.5