The Court adopted the view that a return decision or removal order does not infringe the right to respect for the private life of a third-country national concerned on the sole ground that, if he or she were returned to the receiving country, that national would be exposed to the risk that his or her state of health deteriorates, where such a risk does not reach the severity threshold required under Article 4 of the Charter. Nonetheless, the Court ruled that the national's state of health and the care received must be considered by the competent national authority, along with other relevant factors (such as social ties, dependency, and health fragility), when determining whether the national's right to respect for private life precludes removal.
Relying on Article 2 (right to life) and Article 3 (prohibition on inhuman or degrading treatment), the
applicants complain that their expulsion to Syria would put them at grave physical risk. Some of the
applicants also complain under Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) that they had no effective
domestic remedies in respect of their complaints under Articles 2 and 3 that their detention pending
removal was arbitrary and the examination of their complaints against detention orders was not
speedy.
