Administration of justice / Suspensive effect

The case concerned the applicant’s removal to Sudan by the Belgian authorities in spite of a court decision ordering the suspension of the measure. The Court found in particular that on account of procedural defects attributable to the Belgian authorities prior to the applicant’s removal to Sudan, he had been prevented from pursuing the asylum application that he had lodged in Belgium and the Belgian authorities had not sufficiently assessed the real risks that he faced in Sudan. In addition, by deporting the applicant in spite of the court order to suspend the measure, the authorities had rendered ineffective the applicant’s successful appeal.

27 October 2020 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return - Effective remedy - Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures - Suspensive effect | Countries: Belgium - Sudan

18 December 2014 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return - Regional instruments - Return conditions - Right to health - Suspensive effect | Countries: Belgium - Nigeria

4 September 2014 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Criminal justice - Extradition - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Suspensive effect | Countries: Belgium - Tunisia - United States of America

17 April 2014 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return - Expulsion - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Illegal immigrants / Undocumented migrants - National security / Public order - Right to family life - Right to health - Suspensive effect | Countries: Belgium - Georgia - Italy