Burden / standard of proof / Credibility assessment

On those grounds, the Court (Third Chamber) hereby rules: 1. Article 40(2) of Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection, read in conjunction with Article 4(2) 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, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation under which any document submitted by an applicant for international protection in support of a subsequent application is automatically considered not to constitute a ‘new element or finding’, within the meaning of that provision, when the authenticity of that document cannot be established or its source objectively verified. 2. Article 40 of Directive 2013/32, read in conjunction with Article 4(1) and (2) of Directive 2011/95, must be interpreted as meaning, first, that the assessment of the evidence submitted in support of an application for international protection cannot vary according to whether the application is a first application or a subsequent application and, second, that a Member State is required to cooperate with an applicant for the purpose of assessing the relevant elements of his or her subsequent application, when that applicant submits, in support of that application, documents the authenticity of which cannot be established.

10 June 2021 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Topic(s): Credibility assessment - Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures | Countries: Afghanistan - Netherlands

an investigation into the origin of a foreign national is the responsibility of the state secretary and is not limited to a language analysis. If a language analysis does not provide a definitive answer about the origin of the applicant, but the State Secretary maintains his position that an alleged origin is not credible, he will have to motivate this. The State Secretary has, and wrongly, not been able to assess the credibility of the applicant's statement that she has been living indoors for 15 years. He also wrongly failed to respond to the report by Buro Kleurkracht that supports her story. The State Secretary has therefore not soundly substantiated that the origin of the applicant is not credible.

4 October 2018 | Judicial Body: Netherlands, The: Council of State (Raad van State) | Topic(s): Credibility assessment - Evidence (including age and language assessments / medico-legal reports) | Countries: Iraq - Netherlands

The Council of State handed down four judgments on 15 November 2016 regarding the intensity of judicial review with regards to the credibility assessment done by the administration.

15 November 2016 | Judicial Body: Netherlands, The: Council of State (Raad van State) | Legal Instrument: 2013 Recast Asylum Procedures Directive (EU) | Topic(s): Credibility assessment - Effective remedy | Countries: Netherlands

29 December 2015 | Judicial Body: Netherlands, The: Council of State (Raad van State) | Topic(s): 1951 Refugee Convention - Country of origin information (COI) - Credibility assessment - EU Qualification Directive - Palestinian | Countries: Netherlands - Palestine, State of

8 July 2015 | Judicial Body: Netherlands, The: Council of State (Raad van State) | Topic(s): Credibility assessment - Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) - Persecution on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity - Social group persecution | Countries: Afghanistan - Gambia - Netherlands - Uganda

2 December 2014 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Topic(s): Credibility assessment - EU Qualification Directive - Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) - Persecution on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity | Countries: Afghanistan - Gambia - Netherlands - Uganda

18 December 2013 | Judicial Body: Netherlands, The: Council of State (Raad van State) | Topic(s): Credibility assessment - Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) - Refugees sur place - Well-founded fear of persecution | Countries: Netherlands - Sierra Leone

25 March 2013 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Topic(s): Credibility assessment - EU Qualification Directive - Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) - Persecution on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity | Countries: Netherlands

The case summary in English has been prepared in the framework of the Knowledge-Based Harmonisation of European Asylum Practices Project (2010-2012), co-financed by the European Refugee Fund.

18 August 2011 | Judicial Body: Netherlands, The: Council of State (Raad van State) | Countries: Netherlands - Uganda

The case summary in English has been prepared in the framework of the Knowledge-Based Harmonisation of European Asylum Practices Project (2010-2012), co-financed by the European Refugee Fund.

14 April 2011 | Judicial Body: Netherlands, The: The Hague District Court | Countries: Netherlands - Somalia