Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Reset
Spain: National Court. Chamber of Contentious-Administrative Proceedings n. 5177/2017, 5th December 2017, Appeal No. 234/2017
Country of applicant: Gambia

When examining the acceptance of an asylum claim, the authorities have to study whether the testimony of the applicant is based on presumably true facts. Only if it is manifestly false could the admission of this application be denied.

The principle of family unity has to be taken into account regarding the assessment of the circumstances of the applicant, especially since his sister’s application for international protection was accepted.

Date of decision: 05-12-2017
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 1A (2),Art 1F,Art 33,Article 7,Article 11,Article 23,Article 24,Article 25,Article 26,Article 27,Article 28,Article 29,Article 30,Article 31,Article 32,Article 33,Article 34,Article 35
Poland - Ruling of the Supreme Administrative Court from 20 April 2016 OSK 3459/15 dismissing the cassation complaint regarding the case of a housing rental agreement for a refugee
Country of applicant: Russia

The Supreme Administrative Count in the case concerning housing for a refugee ruled that the applicant, as a refugee, has found herself in a very specific situation, which was not taken into account by the authority. The applicant was not able to submit all the documents and information about the members of the family who stayed in Chechnya in order to obtain housing. It is beyond any doubt that the applicant and her children cannot live with their relatives, because other members of their family are in Chechnya, so the missing information could not have had any influence on the case whatsoever.

The Supreme Administrative Court found that it is the authority which is obliged to establish all the facts and find the objective truth. Although the local act imposes an obligation on the applicant to present concrete evidence, it cannot be stated, that justifiable problems with completing the evidence by the applicant exempted the authority from its own obligation to examine the case and enabled to automatically dismiss the application. Such an understanding would be inconsistent with article 6 of the 1951 Convention relating to the status of refugees.

Date of decision: 20-04-2016
Relevant International and European Legislation: 1951 Refugee Convention,European Union Law,International Law,Art 6,EN - Recast Qualification Directive, Directive 2011/95/EU of 13 December 2011,Article 33
CJEU - Joined Cases C‑443/14 and C‑444/14, Kreis Warendorf v Ibrahim Alo and Amira Osso v Region Hannover
Country of applicant: Syria

Article 33 of the Qualification Directive, read in conjunction with the Geneva Convention, requires Member States to allow persons to whom they have granted subsidiary protection status not only to move freely within their territory but also to choose their place of residence within that territory.  However, the Directive does not prevent beneficiaries of subsidiary protection status from being subject to a residence condition for the purpose of promoting their integration where said group of persons are not in a comparable situation as non-EU citizens. 

Date of decision: 01-03-2016
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 32,Art 26,European Union Law,International Law,Art 23,EN - Recast Qualification Directive, Directive 2011/95/EU of 13 December 2011,Recital (3),Recital (4),Recital (6),Recital (8),Recital (9),Recital (16),Recital (23),Recital (24),Recital (33),Recital (39),Article 20,Article 29,Article 32,Article 33