Last Updated: Tuesday, 23 May 2023, 12:44 GMT

Legal Information

Selected filters: Eritrea
Filter:
Showing 11-20 of 229 results
Switzerland: Judgement FAC E-4639_2017 of 25 September 2019[1530]

Leading case concerning family reunification and safe third country: The appellant was recognized as refugee in Italy on 16 November 2009 He went to Switzerland for family reunification. The fact that a person has already been granted protection as a refugee and asylum in another Dublin State constitutes a "special circumstance" within the meaning of Art. 51 para. 1 of the Swiss Asylum Law which precludes the granting of family asylum.

25 September 2019 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Family reunification - Refugee / Asylum law - Safe third country | Countries: Eritrea - Switzerland

E. v Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie (C‑635/17) (request for preliminary ruling)

1. The Court of Justice of the European Union has jurisdiction, on the basis of Article 267 TFEU, to interpret Article 11(2) of Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification in a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings, where a national court is called upon to rule on an application for family reunification lodged by a beneficiary of subsidiary protection, if that provision was made directly and unconditionally applicable to such a situation under national law. 2. Article 11(2) of Directive 2003/86 must be interpreted as precluding, in circumstances such as those at issue in the main proceedings, in which an application for family reunification has been lodged by a sponsor benefiting from subsidiary protection in favour of a minor of whom she is the aunt and allegedly the guardian, and who resides as a refugee and without family ties in a third country, that application from being rejected solely on the ground that the sponsor has not provided official documentary evidence of the death of the minor’s biological parents and, consequently, that she has an actual family relationship with him, and that the explanation given by the sponsor to justify her inability to provide such evidence has been deemed implausible by the competent authorities solely on the basis of the general information available concerning the situation in the country of origin, without taking into consideration the specific circumstances of the sponsor and the minor and the particular difficulties they have encountered, according to their testimony, before and after fleeing their country of origin.

13 March 2019 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Complementary forms of protection - Country of origin information (COI) - Evidence (including age and language assessments / medico-legal reports) - Family reunification | Countries: Eritrea - Netherlands

Conclusion de l'Avocat general Wahl dans l'affaire C-635/17 E. contre Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie

Propose a la cour par le A.G. : L’article 11, paragraphe 2, de la directive 2003/86/CE du Conseil, du 22 septembre 2003, relative au droit au regroupement familial, doit être interprété en ce sens qu’il ne s’oppose pas à une législation nationale en vertu de laquelle le bénéficiaire d’une protection internationale est tenu, aux fins de l’examen de sa demande de regroupement familial, d’expliquer d’une manière plausible les raisons pour lesquelles il se trouve dans l’incapacité de fournir des pièces justificatives officielles attestant de l’existence d’un lien familial, pour autant que l’autorité nationale compétente apprécie ces explications au regard non seulement des informations pertinentes, tant générales que particulières, concernant la situation dans le pays d’origine de ce dernier, mais également de la situation particulière dans laquelle celui-ci se trouve.

29 November 2018 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Children's rights - Family reunification - Refugee identity documents - Right to family life | Countries: Eritrea - Netherlands

A.N. v. 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) | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1984 Convention against Torture (CAT) | Topic(s): Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment | Countries: Eritrea - Italy - Switzerland

Urteil E-5022/2017 vom 10. Juli 2018

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

Judgment FAC E-5022/2017 of 10 July 2018

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 | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return - Eritreans - Rejected asylum-seekers | Countries: Eritrea - Switzerland

A. and S. v. Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie, C 550/16

Article 2(f) of Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification, read in conjunction with Article 10(3)(a) thereof, must be interpreted as meaning that a third-country national or stateless person who is below the age of 18 at the time of his or her entry into the territory of a Member State and of the introduction of his or her asylum application in that State, but who, in the course of the asylum procedure, attains the age of majority and is thereafter granted refugee status must be regarded as a ‘minor’ for the purposes of that provision.

12 April 2018 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Family reunification - Unaccompanied / Separated children | Countries: Eritrea - Netherlands

Security Council resolution 2385 (2017) [on renewal of the provisions of para. 2 of Security Council resolution 2142 (2014) until 15 Nov. 2018 concerning the arms embargo on Somalia and on extension of the mandate of the Monitoring Group on Somalia and Eritrea until 15 Dec. 2018]

14 November 2017 | Publisher: UN Security Council | Document type: Resolutions/Recommendations/Declarations

Immigration Appeals Board v. A, B, and C, HR-2017-2078-A, (case no. 2017/670)

whether it is in accordance with the UN Refugee Convention article 28 to refuse to issue travel documents to refugees with lawful residence in Norway, because there is doubt regarding their identities

31 October 2017 | Judicial Body: Norway: Supreme Court | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): National security / Public order - Refugee identity documents - Travel documents | Countries: Eritrea - Iraq - Norway

Urteil D-2311/2016 vom 17. August 2017

17 August 2017 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return - Forced labour - Military service / Conscientious objection / Desertion / Draft evasion / Forced conscription - Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures | Countries: Eritrea - Switzerland

Search Refworld