Case Law

situation in region and Kabul is likely to be qualified as situation of indiscriminate violence resulting from an internal armed conflict in light of subsidiary protection. In these conditions, the prefect had erred in applying the law by deciding that, instead of authorising to register the application in France, the applicant be transferred to Finland where this country had already rejected the asylum application, expelled and issue an entry ban against the applicant.

13 March 2018 | Judicial Body: France: Cour administrative | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): Generalized violence - Internal armed conflict - Refoulement | Countries: Afghanistan - Finland - France

18 November 2016 | Judicial Body: Finland: Helsinki Administrative Court | Topic(s): Internal flight alternative (IFA) / Internal relocation alternative (IRA) / Internal protection alternative (IPA) - Religious persecution (including forced conversion) | Countries: Finland - Iraq

16 November 2016 | Judicial Body: Finland: Supreme Administrative Court | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): Exclusion clauses | Countries: Finland - Iraq

20 April 2016 | Judicial Body: Finland: Supreme Administrative Court | Topic(s): Burden-sharing and international co-operation - International protection - Non-refoulement - Regional instruments | Countries: Afghanistan - Finland - Hungary - Serbia

27 February 2014 | Judicial Body: Canada: Federal Court | Topic(s): Gender-based persecution - Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) - Persecution on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity | Countries: Canada - Finland - Ghana