Case Law

The Court recalls that the exemption clause for asylum is based on restrictive conditions. Under the Asylum Act (AsylA) and subject to the SEM’s approval, a residence permit may be granted in accordance with the applicable provisions on asylum to any person who has stayed in Switzerland for at least five years from the date the asylum application was submitted, whose place of residence has always been known to the authorities and for whom it is a case of serious hardship due to a high level of integration. The appellant fulfils the first two conditions. With respect to the third condition, the Court underlines, in particular, the misuse of procedures for the purpose of artificially extending the appellant’s stay. It reached the conclusion that the person’s track record in Switzerland to date was not of a nature that justified the granting of a residence permit.

26 September 2018 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Topic(s): Rejected asylum-seekers - Residence permits / Residency | Countries: Russian Federation - Switzerland

This decision was about the conditions under which a recognized refugee can be denied asylum, according to article 53 (b) of the Swiss law on Asylum. The case concerns a Turkish national of Kurdish ethnicity suspected to support the armed group PKK.

5 September 2018 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Topic(s): National security / Public order - Terrorism | Countries: Switzerland - Türkiye

The methods of medical age assessment that are used in Switzerland are considered as indications, which are weighted differently depending on their results, to determine whether a person has reached majority (consid. 4.2.2). Moroever, the usual rules for the assessment of evidence must be observed. Medical evidence is a strong indication of a person’s age (consid. 4.2.2).

8 August 2018 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Topic(s): Evidence (including age and language assessments / medico-legal reports) | Countries: Switzerland

the State party has an obligation to refrain from forcibly returning the complainant to Italy and to continue complying with its obligation to provide the complainant, in full consideration with him, with rehabilitation through medical treatment.

3 August 2018 | Judicial Body: UN Committee Against Torture (CAT) | Legal Instrument: 1984 Convention against Torture (CAT) | Topic(s): Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment | Countries: Eritrea - Italy - Switzerland

This case harmonized Switzerland's approach to family reunification with the the decision of the European Court of Human Right (ECtHR) in Hadzhieva v. Bulgaria from February 1 2018, n° 45285/12. The right to family reunification cannot expire if it existed, according to national or international law, at the time when the application was submitted.

25 July 2018 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Topic(s): Family reunification | Countries: Switzerland

The right to family reunion derived from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) does not expire when the child who could benefit from it reaches the age of majority during the procedure. This easing of the case law, which takes into account recent judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, also has procedural implications

25 July 2018 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Topic(s): Family reunification - Right to family life | Countries: Cameroon - Switzerland

10 July 2018 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Topic(s): Military service / Conscientious objection / Desertion / Draft evasion / Forced conscription | Countries: Eritrea - Switzerland

The Federal Administrative Court (FAC) confirmed that Eritrean citizens whose applications for asylum have been rejected may be deported back to Eritrea even if they risk being called up for national service upon return to Eritrea. The obligation to work for the state, the low pay and the indefinite time of the national service, constitutes a disproportionate burden, but does not prevent the enforcement of a deportation order.

7 June 2018 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return - Eritreans - Rejected asylum-seekers | Countries: Eritrea - Switzerland

A Kurdish journalist applied for asylum upon her arrival at Zurich Airport. The State Secretariat for Migration (SEM) decided that the application was not admissible in the airport procedure based on the safe third country principle. The SEM considered that the conditions for a safe return to Brazil, where the journalist had been prior to her arrival in Switzerland, were present. The Court held that SEM needs to examine whether Brazil is safe in the particular case of the applicant. Unlike the third countries listed as “safe countries” by the Federal Council, the asylum authorities must take into consideration the characteristics for each individual case to decide whether the third country offers a sufficient protection against refoulement.

8 February 2018 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Topic(s): Safe third country | Countries: Brazil - Switzerland

https://www.bvger.ch/bvger/de/home/rechtsprechung/entscheiddatenbank-bvger.html

30 January 2018 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): Agents of persecution - Security situation | Countries: Afghanistan - Switzerland