Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Reset
Austria - Asylum Court, 21 November 2011, C2 419963-2/2012
Country of applicant: Afghanistan

The Applicant fled to Austria to be with her husband. She pleaded no reasons for fleeing such as problems of living as a woman in Afghanistan and the Federal Asylum Agency also made no investigations into this aspect. Only in the appeal were specific women’s issues raised. The Asylum Court decided that the Federal Asylum Agency was obliged to undertake the appropriate investigations under apparent theoretical circumstances relevant to asylum (such as gender), even if the party did not initiate such a submission. 

Date of decision: 21-11-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 1A (2),Art 4.3,Art 10.1 (d),Art 9.2 (f),Art 8,Art 9.2
France - CNDA, 2 November 2011, Mr. B., n°10011958
Country of applicant: Kosovo, Serbia

Subsidiary protection was granted to a Roma of Serbian nationality who originated from Kosovo as the Court considered that he would currently face a risk of treatment contrary to human dignity in case of return to Serbia or to Kosovo.

Date of decision: 02-11-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 1A (2),Art 15 (b),Art 2
Greece - Council of State, 25 October 2011, Application No. 3328/2011
Country of applicant: Turkey

The General Secretary of the Ministry of Public Order, having had an application for asylum referred back to it, considered whether the submitted evidence was “new and crucial”. If so, an ab initio examination of the application would be ordered. Failure to give notification of an act does not affect its validity, but only the start of the deadline for submitting an application for its annulment. The copy of the Turkish Government Gazette which promulgated the decision regarding withdrawal of the Applicant's nationality, was new and crucial evidence. There was no justification for refusing the request for an ab initio examination of the Applicant's circumstances, nor for rejecting his application to remain in the country on humanitarian grounds.

Date of decision: 25-10-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 1A (2),EN - Asylum Procedures Directive, Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005,Art 12,Art 33,Art 1A (1)
France - CNDA, 18 October 2011, M. P., Mme P. & Mme T., n°11007041, n°11007040, n°11007042
Country of applicant: Sri Lanka

Since the situation of generalised violence which prevailed in Sri Lanka ended with the military defeat of LTTE combatants in May 2009, the only valid ground for claiming subsidiary protection would be Article L.712-1 b) Ceseda [which transposes Article 15 (b) of the Qualification Directive]. The applicant has to establish an individual risk of persecution or ill-treatment in case of return to his/her country of origin.

Date of decision: 18-10-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 1A (2),Art 15 (c),Art 15 (b),Art 2
Greece - Council of State, 4 October 2011, Application No. 3023/2011
Country of applicant: Iran

The case involved the rejection of an asylum application by an Iranian citizen of Kurdish origins who cited a fear of persecution because of his religious opinions and, specifically, having become a Christian. In support of his claims he submitted his baptism certificate and invoked the punishment stipulated by the legal system in his country of origin for changing his religion. The Minister for Public Order's decision on the party's application was annulled for being insufficiently reasoned.

Date of decision: 04-10-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 1A (2),Art 9
France - CNDA, 26 September 2011, Mr. G., n°09007661
Country of applicant: Russia

The involuntary return of an applicant, who did not intend to abandon his/her asylum application, to his/her country of origin results in the temporary interruption of the assessment of his/her case by the Court as the remedy does not temporarily have any ground.

Date of decision: 26-09-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 1A (2),Art 2 (e)
France - CNDA, 23 September 2011, Mr. D., n°11007337
Country of applicant: Mauritania

An applicant who demonstrated his will to put an end to his situation of servitude in Mauritania was considered as having a behavior which infringes on the customs of this country. He must be considered as a member of a social group whose members are, due to common characteristics which define then in the eyes of the Mauritanian society, likely to face persecution against which authorities are not able to protect them.

Date of decision: 23-09-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 1A (2),Art 10.1 (d)
Greece - Council of State, 29 August 2011, Application No. 2512/2011
Country of applicant: Turkey

The case concerned the interested party's obligation to cite specific facts which can provide evidence that the conditions for falling within the scope of the 1951 Convention had been satisfied. There must be a thorough examination of the main claims and a full justification of any negative decision in the case. If the Minister for Public Order adopts the Committee's negative judgment, then the relevant document must cite not only the interested party's claims but also the questions which were put to the foreigner and the responses he gave. The contested order – based on a defective opinion – referred in general terms to the Applicant not having shown a risk of persecution on racial, political or other grounds, and is deficiently reasoned. The application for annulment was granted.

Date of decision: 29-08-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 1A (2),Art 4.3,Art 9,Art 15,Art 10,Art 9,Art 1A (1)
Germany - High Administrative Court Hessen, 25 August 2011, 8 A 1657/10.A
Country of applicant: Afghanistan

The applicant was eligible for subsidiary protection as an internal armed conflict is taking place in Logar. The applicant, in case of return to Afghanistan, could not relocate to Kabul, since he could not secure his livelihood there. In order to secure his livelihood, he could not rely on property which his family had possessed in the province of Logar.

Date of decision: 25-08-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 1A (2),Art 15 (c),Art 8,Art 4.3
France - CNDA, 29 July 2011, Miss O., n°10020534
Country of applicant: Nigeria

Young Nigerian women, especially those coming from the region of Benin City (State of Edo), who were forced to prostitute themselves in Europe in a transnational network of human trafficking, and who managed to extricate themselves from this network and to stop this forced activity, should not be seen as members of a particular social group in Nigeria. However, they face inhuman or degrading treatment in case of return to their country of origin and should therefore be granted subsidiary protection.

Date of decision: 29-07-2011
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 1A (2),Art 15 (b),Art 10.1 (d),Art 6