Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Reset
Spain: Supreme Court. Chamber of Contentious-Administrative Proceedings n. 1182/2016, 16th March 2016, Appeal No. 2563/2015
Country of applicant: Syria
Keywords: Persecution Grounds/Reasons, Personal circumstances of applicant

The decision of denying asylum is disproportionate, as the fact that the acts of persecution are indiscriminate and affect a large majority of the population do not exclude the application of the 1951 Convention when the necessary elements of the provision are present. The reports of UNHCR were also noted in the Court’s assessment, particularly regarding the risk groups that the organisation has characterised.

Date of decision: 16-03-2016
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 1A (2),Art 9,Art 10,Art 4,Art 33,Art 2 (c),Article 1,Article 18,Article 78
France - National Court of Asylum, 7 January 2016, Mrs S spouse of M and Mr M v Director General of OFPRA
Country of applicant: Kosovo
Keywords: Effective access to procedures, Personal interview, Procedural guarantees, Relevant Facts, Relevant Documentation, Subsequent application

A subsequent application is not admissible unless the interested party presents new facts or elements relating to his personnel situation or to the situation in his country of origin, out of which he could not have had knowledge of previously, and likely, if they have probative value, to modify the appreciation of the legitimacy or the credibility of the application of the interested party.

The director general of OFPRA was right to find that the elements that the applicants presented before him did not significantly increase the probability that they would meet the qualifying conditions to claim protection and that their subsequent applications were inadmissible, without having undertaken a hearing before making the decision on inadmissibility.

Date of decision: 07-01-2016
Relevant International and European Legislation: 1951 Refugee Convention,European Union Law,International 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 33,Article 40,EN - Recast Qualification Directive, Directive 2011/95/EU of 13 December 2011,Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 2010/C 83/01,Article 78
Germany - Administrative Court of Aachen, 17 November 2015, Az. 8 K 658/15.A
Keywords: Effective access to procedures, Effective remedy (right to), Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect), Reception conditions, Dublin Transfer, Access to the labour market, Material reception conditions

The question remains open and needs to be clarified in legal proceedings, whether there are systemic flaws in the Bulgarian asylum procedure and conditions of admission, such as pose a risk of infringement of Article 4 Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (CFR) (cf. Article 3(2) Regulation No. 604/2013(Dublin III)) – in particular in the case of a return under the Dublin system.

Date of decision: 17-11-2015
Relevant International and European Legislation: European Union Law,EN - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,Article 4,EN - Dublin III Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No. 604/2013 of 26 June 2013 (recast Dublin II Regulation),Article 3,Article 17,Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 2010/C 83/01,Article 78
CJEU - Joined cases C‑148/13 to C‑150/13 A, B and C v Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie, 2 December 2014
Keywords: Credibility assessment, Procedural guarantees, Standard of proof, Refugee Status, Membership of a particular social group, Sexual orientation

When verifying an asylum seeker’s claimed sexual orientation, Member States’ freedom of action is constrained by the Charter of Fundamental Rights.

The evaluation of an asylum application should not be based on stereotyped notions and should include an individualised assessment taking into account the applicant’s personal circumstances, vulnerability in particular.

Not declaring homosexuality at the outset to the relevant authorities can not result in a conclusion that the individual’s declaration lacks credibility.

Date of decision: 02-12-2014
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 1A (2),EN - Asylum Procedures Directive, Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005,Art 2,Art 10,Art 4,Recital 10,Recital 17,Art 13,Recital 16,EN - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,Article 3,Article 7,Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 2010/C 83/01,Article 78
ECtHR - Tarakhel v. Switzerland, Application no. 29217/12
Country of applicant: Afghanistan
Keywords: Best interest of the child, Individual assessment, Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Personal circumstances of applicant, Family unity (right to), Child Specific Considerations, Reception conditions, Responsibility for examining application, Dublin Transfer, Material reception conditions, Return, Vulnerable person

This case examined the compatibility of the Dublin II Regulation with the European Convention on Human Rights regarding transfers to Italy under the Dublin II Regulation.

The Court found a violation of Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights if the Swiss authorities were to send an Afghan couple and their six children back to Italy under the Dublin Regulation without having first obtained individual guarantees from the Italian authorities that the applicants would be taken charge of in a manner adapted to the age of the children and that the family would be kept together.

Date of decision: 04-11-2014
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Article 4,Article 18,Article 19,Article 24,EN - Reception Conditions Directive, Directive 2003/9/EC of 27 January 2003,EN - Dublin II Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003,Article 3,Article 8,Article 13,EN - Dublin III Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No. 604/2013 of 26 June 2013 (recast Dublin II Regulation),Article 67,Article 2,Article 6,Article 78
CJEU - C‑481/13, Mohammad Ferooz Qurbani
Country of applicant: Afghanistan

The CJEU ruled that it had no jurisdiction to answer the questions referred as they concerned the direct interpretation of the provisions of the 1951 Geneva Convention.

Date of decision: 17-07-2014
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,Art 14,Art 31,EN - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,Article 18,Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 2010/C 83/01,Article 78
Case C‑604/12, H. N. v Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Ireland, Attorney General
Country of applicant: Pakistan
Keywords: Procedural guarantees, Subsidiary Protection, Protection, Refugee Status

The case concerns the interpretation of Directive 2004/83 and clarifies that the Irish legislation requiring seekers of international protection to follow two separate procedural stages: application for refugee status, and in case of refusal, application for subsidiary protection, is not contrary to EU law if the two applications can be introduced at the same time and if the application for subsidiary protection is considered within a reasonable period of time.

The right to good administration includes the right of any person to have his or her affairs handled impartially and within a reasonable period of time.

Date of decision: 08-05-2014
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Qualification Directive, Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004,1951 Refugee Convention,EN - Asylum Procedures Directive, Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005,Art 2,Art 18,Recital 6,Recital 5,Recital 24,Art 3,Art 4,EN - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,Article 41,Article 78