Case Law
- Belgium: Conseil du Contentieux des Etrangers 1
- Council of Europe 1
- Council of Europe: European Commission on Human Rights 3
- Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights 85
- European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union 7
- France: Conseil d'Etat 1
- Italy: Italian Supreme Court (Corte Suprema di Cassazione) 1
- Luxembourg: Cour administratif 1
- Luxembourg: Tribunal administratif 1
- Norway: Supreme Court 2
- United Kingdom: Court of Appeal (England and Wales) 2
- United Kingdom: House of Lords (Judicial Committee) 1
- United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) 4
- Afghanistan 6
- Albania 1
- Algeria 2
- Austria 4
- Bangladesh 1
- Belgium 5
- Bosnia and Herzegovina 1
- Bulgaria 5
- Cape Verde 1
- Congo, Democratic Republic of the 2
- Croatia 2
- Cyprus 2
- Czech Republic 1
- Côte d'Ivoire 1
- Denmark 2
- Egypt 3
- El Salvador 1
- Eritrea 2
- Finland 1
- France 6
- Georgia 3
- Germany 2
- Ghana 4
- Greece 8
- Hungary 4
- Iran, Islamic Republic of 5
- Iraq 6
- Italy 6
- Kazakhstan 3
- Kenya 2
- Lebanon 1
- Lithuania 2
- Luxembourg 2
- Mali 1
- Malta 2
- Moldova, Republic of 1
- Morocco 2
- Myanmar 1
- Netherlands 10
- New Zealand 1
- Nigeria 3
- North Macedonia 1
- Norway 4
- Pakistan 2
- Palestine, State of 4
- Poland 1
- Romania 2
- Russian Federation 18
- Saudi Arabia 1
- Serbia 2
- Slovenia 3
- Somalia 4
- South Sudan 1
- Spain 2
- Sri Lanka 2
- Sudan 4
- Suriname 1
- Sweden 1
- Switzerland 6
- Syrian Arab Republic 4
- Tajikistan 3
- Togo 1
- Tunisia 1
- Turkey 7
- Turkmenistan 1
- Uganda 1
- Ukraine 1
- United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 16
- United States of America 2
- Uzbekistan 7
- Viet Nam 1
- Zimbabwe 1
- Access to procedures 1
- Adoption 1
- Appeal / Right to appeal 2
- Arbitrary arrest and detention 15
- Armed forces / Military 1
- Armed groups / Militias / Paramilitary forces / Resistance movements 1
- Asylum policy 2
- Asylum-seekers 2
- Burden-sharing and international co-operation 1
- Changes of circumstances in home country 1
- Children's rights 3
- Children-at-risk 3
- Chinese 1
- Citizenship / Nationality law 1
- Complementary forms of protection 4
- Country of origin information (COI) 1
- Credibility assessment 4
- Crime prevention 1
- Crimes against humanity 1
- Criminal justice 1
- Decision on admissibility 15
- Deportation / Forcible return 17
- Effective protection 1
- Effective remedy 15
- Evidence (including age and language assessments / medico-legal reports) 4
- Exhaustion of domestic remedies 4
- Expulsion 23
- Extradition 1
- False documents 1
- Family reunification 13
- Forced labour 1
- Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment 39
- Gang related violence 1
- HIV and AIDS 3
- Human rights and fundamental freedoms 1
- Human rights courts 1
- Humanitarian protection (including tolerated stay) 1
- Illegal immigrants / Undocumented migrants 1
- Immigration Detention 11
- Immigration law 2
- Jurisdiction 2
- Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) 1
- Mental health 1
- Mentally disadvantaged persons 1
- Military service / Conscientious objection / Desertion / Draft evasion / Forced conscription 1
- Minority rights 1
- National security / Public order 4
- Non-refoulement 9
- Non-state agents of persecution 1
- Palestinian 1
- Passports 1
- Persecution based on political opinion 2
- Physical harm 3
- Police 1
- Political asylum 1
- Pre-trial detention 1
- Prevention of discrimination 1
- Prison or detention conditions 11
- Proof of nationality 1
- Reception 7
- Refoulement 5
- Refugee / Asylum law 6
- Refugee identity documents 1
- Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures 4
- Refugees 1
- Regional instruments 1
- Registration 1
- Rejected asylum-seekers 1
- Rejection at border 1
- Residence permits / Residency 5
- Right to family life 36
- Right to health 1
- Right to liberty and security 18
- Right to life 4
- Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness 1
- Safe third country 1
- Security situation 1
- Statelessness 7
- Tamil 1
- Terrorism 3
- Torture 1
- Transit 1
- Travel documents 1
- Unaccompanied / Separated children 1
- Visas 2
|
Abu Zubaydah v. Lithuania (application no. 46454/11)
violations of Article 3 (prohibition of torture) of the European Convention on Human Rights, because of the Government’s failure to effectively investigate Mr Husayn’s allegations and because of its complicity in the CIA’s actions that had led to ill-treatment; and violations of Article 5 (right to liberty and security), Article 8 (right to respect for private life), and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy), in conjunction with Article 3. 31 May 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Jurisdiction | Countries: Lithuania - Palestine, State of - United States of America |
|
CASE OF LJATIFI v. THE FORMER YUGOSLAV REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA (Application no. 19017/16)
“(….) even where national security is at stake, the concepts of lawfulness and the rule of law in a democratic society require that deportation measures affecting fundamental human rights be subject to some form of adversarial proceedings before an independent authority or a court competent to effectively scrutinise the reasons for them and review the relevant evidence, if need be with appropriate procedural limitations on the use of classified information. 17 May 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Expulsion - National security / Public order | Countries: North Macedonia - Serbia |
|
CASE OF IBROGIMOV v. RUSSIA (Application no. 32248/12)
in the light of the overwhelming European and international consensus geared towards abolishing the outstanding restrictions on entry, stay and residence of HIV-positive non nationals who constitute a particularly vulnerable group, the respondent Government failed in their duty to put forward compelling reasons or any objective justification for their differential treatment for health reason 15 May 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Expulsion - HIV and AIDS | Countries: Russian Federation - Uzbekistan |
|
CASE OF MAINOV v. RUSSIA (Application no. 11556/17)
detention under Article 5 § 1 (f) of the Convention must be carried out in good faith; it must be closely connected to the ground of detention relied on by the Government; the place and conditions of detention should be appropriate; and the length of the detention should not exceed that reasonably required for the purpose pursued 15 May 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Statelessness | Countries: Russian Federation |
|
CASE OF BISTIEVA AND OTHERS v. POLAND (Application no. 75157/14)
violation of article 8 - child’s best interests cannot be confined to keeping the family together - detention is mesure of last resort -consideration should be given to alternative measures - detention of minors called for greater speed and diligence on the part of the authorities 10 April 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Right to family life | Countries: Germany - Poland - Russian Federation |
|
AFFAIRE A.E.A. c. GRÈCE (Requête no 39034/12)
The possibility of introducing an asylum claim is a conditio sine qua non for the effective protection of persons in need of international protection. If authorities do not guarantee unhindered access to the asylum procedure, asylum-seekers can not make use of the procedural rights foreseen within the asylum procedure and are at risk of being arrested at any time. Hence even if the asylum procedure offers effective safeguards, these are of no use if, as in the present case, the asylum claim is not registered for a long period of time. [85] violation of article 13 (effective remedy) in combination with article 3 ECHR. 15 March 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Access to procedures - Effective protection - Effective remedy - Registration | Countries: Egypt - Greece - Sudan - Turkey |
|
CASE OF EJIMSON v. GERMANY (Application no. 58681/12)
in a case which concerns family life as well as immigration, the extent of a State’s obligations will vary according to the particular circumstances of the persons involved and the general interest. 1 March 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Expulsion - Rejected asylum-seekers - Residence permits / Residency - Right to family life | Countries: Germany - Nigeria |
|
CASE OF MSKHILADZE v. RUSSIA (Application no. 47741/16)
- detention arbitrary since it should have been clear to the authorities that removal was impracticable - violation of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention on account of the lack of a possibility to take proceedings for review of the continued detention 13 February 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Statelessness | Countries: Russian Federation |
|
AFFAIRE M.A. c. FRANCE (Requête no 9373/15)
- the expulsion of the applicant, whose conviction for terrorist offences had been known to the Algerian authorities, had exposed him to a real and serious risk of treatment contrary to Article 3. - French authorities deliberately created a situation whereby the applicant would have great difficulty in submitting a request for an interim measure to the Court, and had lowered the level of protection under Article 3 of the Convention. - acutely aware of the extent of the danger posed to the community by terrorism and that it was legitimate for Contracting States to take a very firm stand against those who contributed to terrorist acts. 1 February 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Expulsion - Terrorism - Torture | Countries: Algeria - France |
|
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Third Chamber) on preliminary ruling request under Article 267 TFEU from the Szegedi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság (Administrative and Labour Court, Szeged, Hungary), in Case C‑473/16, F v. Bevándorlási és Állampolgársági Hivatal (Office for Immigration and Citizenship, Hungary)
This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Article 1 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’) and Article 4 of Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted (OJ 2011 L 337, p. 9). 25 January 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Credibility assessment - Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) | Countries: Hungary - Nigeria |
