UNHCR is not responsible for the content and availability of non-UNHCR websites. Content displays in a new window.
Case of A.B. and Others v. Poland (Application no. 42907/17)
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 | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Rejection at border | Countries: Belarus - Poland - Russian Federation |
Case of A.I. and Others v. Poland (Application no. 39028/17)
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 | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Rejection at border | Countries: Belarus - Poland - Russian Federation |
D.A. and Others v. Poland
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 | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment | Countries: Poland - Syrian Arab Republic |
AFFAIRE BILALOVA ET AUTRES c. POLOGNE
(Requête no 23685/14)
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 | Document type: Case Law | 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 |
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 | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Right to family life | Countries: Germany - Poland - Russian Federation |
Gorny v. Poland
8 June 2010 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Criminal justice - Evidence (including age and language assessments / medico-legal reports) - Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness | Countries: Poland |
Kozak v. Poland
2 March 2010 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Family law - Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) - Right to family life | Countries: Poland |
Adamkiewicz c. Pologne
2 March 2010 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Criminal justice - Independence of judiciary - Legal representation / Legal aid | Countries: Poland |
Muskhadzhiyeva et autres c. Belgique
19 January 2010 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Asylum-seekers - Children's rights - Deportation / Forcible return - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Immigration Detention - Safe country of origin - Single procedure | Countries: Russian Federation |
A.E. v. Poland
This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision. 31 March 2009 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Criminal justice - Freedom of movement - Right to family life - Right to justice | Countries: Libya - Poland |