EUAA Case Law Database

Latest news for users

*** Please fill in this survey to evaluate the EUAA Case Law Database and suggest improvements. We welcome your feedback!

*** Second jurisprudential analysis under the EUAA Case Law Grant is published, drafted by Comillas Pontifical University on Jurisprudence on Asylum Pronounced by the European Court of Human Rights in 2024-2025 (Call EUBA-EUAA-2025-ASYLUMCASELAW). January 2026.

*** Recent EUAA publications on asylum jurisprudence:

EUAA Quarterly Overview of Asylum Case Law, Issue 1/2026 for asylum judgments from December 2025 to February 2026. To receive the Quarterly by email, please subscribe here.
Jurisprudence related to Asylum Pronounced by the Court of Justice of the EU in 2025 (March 2026).
Jurisprudence related to the Dublin Procedure in 2025 (Feb 2026).
Jurisprudence on LGBTIQ Applicants in International Protection (September 2025) also in FR, EL, IT, ES.
Analysis of jurisprudence on the implementation of the Dublin procedure (June 2025).
Jurisprudence related to asylum pronounced by the Court of Justice of the EU in 2024 (April 2025) also in FR, DE, EL, IT, ES.
Jurisprudence related to Gender-Based Violence against Women. Analysis of asylum case law from 2020-2024 (Feb 2025) also in FR, DE, EL, IT, ES.

The EUAA Information and Analysis Sector can provide, upon request, online sessions on how to use the EUAA Case Law Database. We also provide presentations on the latest jurisprudence interpreting the Common European Asylum System. For more information, contact us at caselawdb@euaa.europa.eu

*** Please fill in this <a href="https&#58;//ec.europa.eu/eusurvey/runner/EUAA-Case-Law-Database-Satisfaction-Survey">survey</a> to evaluate the EUAA Case Law Database and suggest improvements. We welcome your feedback!

&#160;

*** Second jurisprudential analysis under the EUAA Case Law Grant is published, drafted by Comillas Pontifical University on&#160;<a href="/Documents/2026_ECtHR_jurisprudence_asylum-EN.pdf">Jurisprudence on Asylum Pronounced by the European Court of Human Rights in 2024-2025</a> (Call EUBA-EUAA-2025-ASYLUMCASELAW). January 2026.

&#160;

*** Recent EUAA&#160;publications on asylum jurisprudence&#58;&#160;

<ul>
	<li>
	EUAA <a href="/Newsletters/2026_EUAA_Quarterly_Overview_Asylum_Case_Law_Issue1_EN.pdf">Quarterly Overview of Asylum Case Law, Issue 1/2026</a>&#160;for asylum judgments from December 2025 to February 2026.&#160;To receive the Quarterly&#160;by email, please&#160;<a href="/pages/subscribe.aspx" target="_blank">subscribe here</a>.
	</li>
	<li>
	<a href="/Documents/Factsheet42_CJEU_jurisprudence_EN.pdf">Jurisprudence related to Asylum Pronounced by the Court of Justice of the EU in 2025</a> (March 2026).
	</li>
	<li>
	<a href="https&#58;//www.euaa.europa.eu/publications/jurisprudence-related-dublin-procedure-2025">Jurisprudence related to the Dublin Procedure in 2025</a> (Feb 2026).
	</li>
	<li>
	<a href="/Documents/2025_factsheet39_case_law_LGBTIQ_applicants_EN.pdf">Jurisprudence on LGBTIQ Applicants in International Protection</a> (September 2025) also in&#160;<a href="/Documents/2025_factsheet39_case_law_LGBTIQ_applicants_FR_1.pdf">FR</a>, <a href="/Documents/2025_factsheet39_case_law_LGBTIQ_applicants_EL.pdf">EL</a>,&#160;<a href="/Documents/2025_factsheet39_case_law_LGBTIQ_applicants_IT.pdf">IT</a>,&#160;<a href="/Documents/2025_factsheet39_case_law_LGBTIQ_applicants_ES.pdf">ES</a>.
	</li>
	<li>
	<a href="/Documents/Factsheet%2033_jurisprudence_Dublin_procedure_EN.pdf">Analysis of jurisprudence on the implementation of the Dublin procedure</a>&#160;(June 2025).
	</li>
	<li>
	<a href="/Documents/Factsheet32_CJEU_jurisprudence_EN.pdf">Jurisprudence related to asylum pronounced by the Court of Justice of the EU in 2024</a> (April 2025) also in&#160;<a href="/Documents/Factsheet32_CJEU_jurisprudence_FR.pdf">FR</a>, <a href="/Documents/Factsheet32_CJEU_jurisprudence_DE.pdf">DE</a>,&#160;<a href="/Documents/Factsheet32_CJEU_jurisprudence_EL.pdf">EL</a>,&#160;<a href="/Documents/Factsheet32_CJEU_jurisprudence_IT.pdf">IT</a>,&#160;<a href="/Documents/Factsheet32_CJEU_jurisprudence_ES.pdf">ES</a>.
	</li>
	<li><a href="/Documents/2025_jurisprudence_gender_based_violence_EN.pdf">Jurisprudence related to Gender-Based Violence against Women. Analysis of asylum case law from 2020-2024</a>&#160;(Feb 2025) also in <a href="/Documents/2025_jurisprudence_gender_based_violence_FR.pdf">FR</a>, <a href="/Documents/2025_jurisprudence_gender_based_violence_DE.pdf">DE</a>, <a href="/Documents/2025_jurisprudence_gender_based_violence_EL.pdf">EL</a>, <a href="/Documents/2025_jurisprudence_gender_based_violence_IT.pdf">IT</a>, <a href="/Documents/2025_jurisprudence_gender_based_violence_ES.pdf">ES</a>.</li>
</ul>

&#160;

The EUAA Information and Analysis Sector&#160;can provide, upon request, online sessions on&#160;how to use&#160;the EUAA Case Law Database. We also provide presentations on the latest jurisprudence interpreting the Common European Asylum System.&#160;For more information, contact us at&#160;caselawdb@euaa.europa.eu

Get our Quarterly Overview of Asylum Case Law

Click here to subscribe

Read our publications

Latest updates

04/06/2026

EU: The CJEU ruled that, pursuant to Article 46(3) of the recast Asylum procedures Directive, jointly with Article 47 of the EU Charter, a court of first instance, seized with an appeal against a decision rejecting an application for international protection, has the power to pronounce a binding ruling on the credibility of the account supporting that application, on the plausibility of the applicant's fear of persecution or the real risk of serious harm to the applicant if returned to their country of origin, and on the merits of the application. Moreover, it clarified that the expression ‘well-founded fear of being persecuted’ in Article 2(d) of the recast Qualification Directive refers to a situation where there is a reasonable likelihood that an applicant for international protection will be persecuted upon return to their country of origin and for such determination, national authorities must conduct an individual, specific and objective assessment.

The request for a preliminary ruling was submitted in the context of asylum applications lodged in the Netherlands by eight Iraqi nationals, members of the same family consisting in two...

04/06/2026

EU: The CJEU clarified that, in a situation in which applicants for international protection are subject to an enforceable decision on a transfer under the Dublin III Regulation, they must be guaranteed an adequate standard of living according to the recast Reception Conditions Directive, and they are entitled to material reception conditions which include, as a minimum, benefits in kind or equivalently, in the form of an allowance or vouchers, covering clothing, food, housing, personal care goods and a financial allowance intended to cover the person’s essential personal needs. The court further held that the concept of subsequent application is not applicable and cannot justify withdrawal or limitation of material reception conditions in such a situation.

The German Federal Social Court referred questions to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling on whether national provisions reducing material reception conditions are compatible with the recast Reception Conditions Directive (RCD), specifically in the context of reception of an asylum applicant pending enforcement of a decision on a Dublin transfer. By decision of 25 October 2021,...

26/05/2026

COE: The ECtHR found that the assessment of an asylum application submitted by a Syrian national in Greece complied with the Convention standards, holding that the Greek authorities thoroughly considered the conditions the applicant would face if returned to Türkiye, by reviewing relevant reports on the situation in Türkiye in 2016, in the context of the EU - Türkiye agreement. The court concluded that in 2016 there was no systematic practice of refoulement from Türkiye to Syria. However, the court found Greece in violation of Article 3 for the conditions of detention at a police station in 2016.

According to the court's press release: "Principal facts The applicant, J.B., is a Syrian national who was born in 1965 and lives in Caen (France). According to J.B., he had left Syria in April 2015 as he was in danger from the Islamic State due to his Armenian origin and Christian faith, and also because the country was at war. He travelled through Lebanon to reach Türkiye, where he stayed for approximately a year, having been given temporary protection status. He...

05/05/2026

DE: The Higher Administrative Court of Bremen referred questions before the CJEU for a preliminary ruling on whether the authority adopting a return decision must carry out a fresh refoulement assessment when international protection has been previously revoked by another authority which has already conducted such assessment and concluded that Article 3 of the ECHR and Article 19(2) of the EU Charter do not preclude removal.

An Afghan national was rejected refugee status in Germany in 2017, but he was granted subsidiary protection and issued a residence permit, extended until 5 July 2021. The applicant suffered from substance addiction and was sentenced to a custodial sentence of three years and five months for attempted serious extortion. Due to that...

22/04/2026

LT: The Supreme Administrative Court ruled that children of already recognised refugees, born while the parents hold international protection in Lithuania, must be granted protection without an individual merits assessment, as stipulated in domestic law. Referring to CJEU jurisprudence on the need to preserve family unity, the court explained that granting of derived protection to these children is not contrary to Article 3 of the recast Qualification Directive and confirmed the lower court ruling which annulled the refusal of international protection for the minor applicant.

The applicant, a minor born in Lithuania, applied for international protection in Lithuania as a child of her mother, who had been granted refugee status in Lithuania in 2018 and held a...

20/05/2026

IT: The Rome Court of Appeal refused to validate the detention of a Moroccan applicant transferred to the Gjader CPR in Albania after lodging an asylum application during expulsion proceedings, finding that the national provisions implementing the Italy-Albania Protocol, which allowed asylum applicants to remain in Albania pending examination of their applications, were incompatible with the right to remain in the Member State under Article 9 of the recast APD and, prospectively, Article 10 of the APR.

A Moroccan national was issued an expulsion order by the Prefect of Pistoia on 20 January 2020. On 6 April 2026, the Questore of Potenza ordered his detention in the Repatriation Detention Centre (CPR) of Potenza pursuant to Article 14(1) of Legislative Decree...