Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Reset
Spain - National Court. Chamber of Contentious-Administrative Proceedings n. 478/2022, 24 February 2022, Appeal n. 769/2020
Country of applicant: Ukraine
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Internal protection, Real risk, International armed conflict

Account must be taken of the evolution of the circumstances in the country of origin, from the moment of the application for international protection, until the moment when the Court has to take a decision.

In this instance, relying on the change of circumstances that has taken place in Ukraine since the Applicants introduced the demand, the Court grants subsidiary protection status to a Ukrainian family. The current international conflict taking place in Ukraine exposes them to a risk of  serious harm.

Date of decision: 24-02-2022
Relevant International and European Legislation: Article 2,Article 10,Article 36,Article 46,Recital (15),Article 2,Article 3,Article 4,Article 8
CJEU - C‑662/17, E.G. v Republika Slovenija
Country of applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Effective remedy (right to), Subsidiary Protection, Refugee Status

The CJEU ruled on whether an individual could appeal a decision which refused refugee status but granted subsidiary protection status, even if the rights and benefits afforded by each international protection status are identical in national law.

Date of decision: 18-10-2018
Relevant International and European Legislation: Article 1,Article 10,Article 46,Art 46,Recital (8),Recital (9),Recital (39),Article 2,Article 3,Article 11,Article 12,Article 14,Article 16,Article 17,Article 19,Article 20,Article 21,Article 24
CJEU - C-652/16, Nigyar Rauf Kaza Ahmedbekova, Rauf Emin Ogla Ahmedbekov v Zamestnik-predsedatel na Darzhavna agentsia za bezhantsite
Country of applicant: Azerbaijan
Keywords: Individual assessment, Personal circumstances of applicant, Refugee Status, Political Opinion

CJEU rules on the correct processing of applications for international protection lodged separately by family members and the interrelationship between them.

Date of decision: 04-10-2018
Relevant International and European Legislation: European Union Law,EN - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,Article 7,Article 18,Article 47,EN - Recast Asylum Procedures Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council,Article 2,Article 7,Article 33,Article 40,Article 46,EN - Recast Qualification Directive, Directive 2011/95/EU of 13 December 2011,Recital (14),Article 2,Article 3,Article 4,Article 10,Article 12,Article 13,Article 15,Article 18,Article 23,Article 31
Germany - Federal Administrative Court, Decision 1 C 29/17, 19 April 2018
Country of applicant: Eritrea
Keywords: Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Subsidiary Protection, Membership of a particular social group, Political Opinion, Gender Based Persecution, Female genital mutilation, Family member, Family reunification

§ 104 para. 13 S. 1 of AufenthG (Residence Law) impedes the claim of a person with subsidiary protection for the assessment of a case of non-refoulment referring to the situation in the state of origin according to § 60 Abs. 5 AufenthG and Art. 3 ECHR in order to enable family reunion due to the lack of a defensible interest. 

Date of decision: 19-04-2018
Relevant International and European Legislation: Article 3,Article 3,Article 4,Article 9,Article 10
Austria - Regional Administrative Court of Upper Austria, LVwG-350363/15/KLi/CHö, 18 December 2017
Country of applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Subsidiary Protection, Protection, Refugee Status, More favourable provisions

The Regional Administrative Court of Upper Austria requests a preliminary ruling of the CJEU concerning the interpretation of Article 29 Directive 2011/95/EU in the context of social assistance for persons entitled to asylum with a temporary residence permit.

1) Must Article 29 Directive 2011/95/EU, entitling persons subject to international protection to the same level of social assistance in the Member State as nationals of this Member State, be interpreted as fulfilling the conditions for direct effect as set out in the CJEU’s jurisprudence?

2) Must Article 29 Directive 2011/95/EU be interpreted in the way, that it opposes national legislation that provides for persons with a temporary residence permit the same level of social assistance as for persons falling under subsidiary protection, while persons with a permanent residence permit are allowed to the social assistance provided for nationals of the Member State concerned?

Date of decision: 18-12-2017
Relevant International and European Legislation: European Union Law,EN - Recast Qualification Directive, Directive 2011/95/EU of 13 December 2011,Article 3,Article 24,Article 29,EN - Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 2010/C 83/01 - Art 288,Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 2010/C 83/01,Article 267 § 2,Article 267 § 1 (b)
ECtHR - Paposhvili v. Belgium, Application no. 41738/10,13 December 2016
Country of applicant: Georgia
Keywords: Burden of proof, Country of origin information, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports, Relevant Documentation, Country of origin, Family unity (right to), Health (right to)

Article 3 ECHR is triggered in cases involving the removal of a seriously ill individual where the absence of appropriate treatment in the receiving country or the lack of access to such treatment, exposes the individual to a serious, rapid and irreversible decline in his or her state of health resulting in intense suffering or to a significant reduction in life expectancy.

Access to sufficient and appropriate medical care must be available in reality, not merely in theory and the impact of removal on an applicant must be assessed by considering how an applicant’s condition would evolve after transfer to the receiving State.

Date of decision: 13-12-2016
Relevant International and European Legislation: European Union Law,Council of Europe Instruments,EN - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,Article 19,Article 52,EN - Returns Directive, Directive 2008/115/EC of 16 December 2008,EN - Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms,Article 2,Article 3,Article 8,Article 26,Article 34,Article 37,Article 41,Article 43,EN - Recast Qualification Directive, Directive 2011/95/EU of 13 December 2011,Article 3
Germany – Administrative Court Berlin, 11 September 2016, 33 K 152.15 A
Country of applicant: Russia (Chechnya)
Keywords: First country of asylum, Revocation of protection status, Subsidiary Protection, Refugee Status, Inadmissible application

A renewed application for asylum in a second country is admissible if the nature of international protection applied for differs from the protection already granted. Deportation to the country of the first application or the country of origin is not to be taken into account in this situation.

Date of decision: 11-09-2016
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,Art 17,Art 15,Art 13,Art 14,European Union Law,EN - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,Article 18,EN - Recast Asylum Procedures Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council,Article 10,Article 33,Article 40,Article 46,Article 51,EN - Dublin II Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003,Article 3,Article 16,Article 20,EN - Dublin III Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No. 604/2013 of 26 June 2013 (recast Dublin II Regulation),Article 3,Article 18,EN - Recast Qualification Directive, Directive 2011/95/EU of 13 December 2011,Article 3,Article 12,Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 2010/C 83/01,Article 78