Case Law

The present case concerns refusal of border guards to receive the applicants’ asylum applications and summary removal to a third country, with a risk of refoulement to and ill-treatment in the country origin.

30 June 2022 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Rejection at border | Countries: Belarus - Poland - Russian Federation

The present case concerns refusal of border guards to receive the applicants’ asylum applications and summary removal to a third country, with a risk of refoulement to and ill-treatment in the country origin.

30 June 2022 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Rejection at border | Countries: Belarus - Poland - Russian Federation

The court unanimously: Declares the application admissible; Holds that there has been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the applicants being denied access to the asylum procedure and exposed to a risk of inhuman and degrading treatment and torture in Syria; Holds that it is not necessary to examine whether there has been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the applicants’ treatment by the Polish authorities during border checks; Holds that there has been a violation of Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 to the Convention; Holds that there has been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention taken in conjunction with Article 3 of the Convention and Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 to the Convention; Holds that Poland has failed to discharge its obligations under Article 34 of the Convention; Decides to continue to indicate to the Government under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court that it is desirable in the interests of the proper conduct of the proceedings not to remove the applicants to Belarus – if and when they present themselves at the Polish border crossing – until such time as the present judgment becomes final, or until a further decision is made; Holds (a) that the respondent State is to pay to each of the three applicants, within three months from the date on which the judgment becomes final in accordance with Article 44 § 2 of the Convention, EUR 10,000 (ten thousand euros), to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement, plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants, in respect of non-pecuniary damage; (b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

8 July 2021 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment | Countries: Poland - Syrian Arab Republic

Commission sought a declaration from the Court that, by failing to indicate at regular intervals, and at least every three months, an appropriate number of applicants for international protection who could be relocated swiftly to its territory, the republic of Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic failed to fulfil its obligations

2 April 2020 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Topic(s): Admission quotas - Burden-sharing and international co-operation - Resettlement | Countries: Czech Republic - Greece - Hungary - Italy - Poland

Relying in particular on Article 5 § 1 (f) (right to liberty and security), the applicants complained about their placement and retention in the closed centre for aliens, alleging, inter alia, that they were illegal. Violation of Article 5 § 1 f) – in respect of the applicant children, concerning their retention in the closed centre

26 March 2020 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Children's rights - Expulsion - Rejected asylum-seekers - Right to liberty and security | Countries: Germany - Poland - Russian Federation

national protection (tolerated stay) granted in an EU Member State does not obstruct the assessment of an asylum claim by the court

3 April 2018 | Judicial Body: France: Cour nationale du droit d'asile | Topic(s): Humanitarian protection (including tolerated stay) | Countries: France - Poland - Russian Federation

13 November 2013 | Judicial Body: France: Conseil d'Etat | Topic(s): Chechen - Safe third country - State protection | Countries: France - Poland - Russian Federation