Latest asylum case law

European Union

The CJEU ruled that Article 46(3) of the recast Asylum Procedures Directive, read in the light of Article 47 of the EU Charter and Article 4(3) of the TEU, must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to satisfy the requirement of a full and ex nunc examination, a national court of first instance hearing an action against a negative asylum decision must have the power to order a medical examination of the asylum applicant, where the court considers that the use of that examination is necessary or relevant for the purposes of assessing that application.

03/04/2025

|

EU: Court of Justice of the European Union [CJEU]

|

Judgment

|

C-283/24

B.F., a Lebanese national, requested international protection in Cyprus on 4 September 2018. The applicant claimed that he had been the victim of torture by the Lebanese intelligence agencies and military services due to his political activism and involvement in the paramilitary wing of a Lebanese political party. He added that he was subjected to threats and attempted murder, so he feared that if returned to Lebanon,...

Belgium

The CALL allowed a subsequent application of an Afghan national who worked for the former government in opposition to the Taliban, granting him refugee status after an assessment of individual circumstances, cumulatively in view of documents submitted and country of origin information to conclude to the existence of a well-founded fear of persecution linked to his political beliefs.

23/10/2024

|

BE: Council for Alien Law Litigation [Conseil du Contentieux des Étrangers - CALL]

|

Judgment

|

No 315 351

An Afghan applicant requested international protection in Belgium on 7 May 2019 and the Office of the Commissioner General for Refugees and Stateless Persons (CGRS) rejected his application on 29 November 2019. The CGRS stated that although the applicant's employment with the Afghan Ministry of Defence’s Identification Department under the former government was not disputed, however the applicant worked in...

European Union

The CJEU ruled that Article 10(1)(d) of the recast Qualification Directive must be interpreted as meaning that an asylum applicant targeted by a blood feud in the country of origin for being a member of a family involved in a property dispute may not, for that sole reason, be regarded as belonging to a ‘particular social group’; however, national authorities must determine whether the applicant qualifies for subsidiary protection, as serious harm covers a real threat to the applicant of being killed or subjected to acts of violence inflicted by a member of his or her family or community.

27/03/2025

|

EU: Court of Justice of the European Union [CJEU]

|

Judgment

|

C-217/23

A N, an Afghan national and an ethnic Pashtun from the Province of Laghman (Afghanistan), requested international protection in Austria on 4 November 2015, claiming that he was at risk of persecution in Afghanistan on account of a blood feud targeting persons who were related to his father, due to a property dispute concerning agricultural land between his father and his father’s cousins. A N stated...

Netherlands

The District Court of the Hague, seated in Amsterdam, submitted several questions to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling on the meaning, standards and conditions of specialised detention facilities as set out in the recast Reception Conditions Directive, with reference to the Schiphol Judicial Complex which is used for detention of applicants for asylum and for criminal detention at the same time.

20/03/2025

|

NL: Court of The Hague [Rechtbank Den Haag]

|

Decision

|

NL25.6640

On 24 November 2024, the Minister of Asylum and Migration (hereinafter “the Minister”), imposed the measure of deprivation of liberty on the applicant based on Article 6, third paragraph of the Aliens Act 2000. On 13 December 2024, the applicant lodged an appeal before the Court of the Hague on the grounds that the continuation of her deprivation of liberty from 10 January to 16...

Netherlands

The Council of State ruled that the Netherlands may continue to transfer asylum applicants to Cyprus, as although Cyprus exceeds the maximum period for deciding on an asylum application, there are no structural shortcomings in the reception facilities in Cyprus that would amount to ill treatment and no evidence that asylum applicants transferred under the Dublin procedure are systematically placed in detention and would not have access to an effective remedy against a negative asylum decision.

26/03/2025

|

NL: Council of State [Afdeling Bestuursrechtspraak van de Raad van State]

|

Decision

|

No 202403478/1/V3

A Somali national entered the European Union in Cyprus and subsequently applied for asylum in the Netherlands.

Because under the Dublin III Regulation Cyprus was considered responsible for processing the asylum application, by decision of 18 April 2024, the State Secretary for Justice and Security decided not to examine the application in the Netherlands and to transfer the applicant back to Cyprus. The...

Sweden

The Migration Court of Appeal ruled that it was proportionate to revoke refugee status for a third country national convicted for aggravated weapons offenses, which was considered to be a particularly serious crime, thus rendering the applicant to be considered a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat to a fundamental public interest.

06/03/2025

|

SE: Migration Court of Appeal [Migrationsöverdomstolen]

|

Decision

|

UM 4827-24, ME 2025:3

AA, a national of Iraq, was granted refugee status in Sweden in July 2017. In September 2020, he was sentenced to 2 years and 6 months in prison for assault, aggravated unlawful threats, petty drug offenses, and serious weapons offenses. After the sentence remained final, the Swedish Migration Agency decided in January 2024 to revoke AA's refugee status because the serious weapons offense he was convicted of...

Germany

The Federal Administrative Court ruled that the interests of the foreigner to remain must be considered in the balancing of interests required in the event of an expulsion ordered purely for general preventive reasons, even if a ban on deportation has been established in favour of the foreigner.

24/03/2025

|

DE: Federal Administrative Court [Bundesverwaltungsgericht]

|

Judgment

|

1 C 15.23

An Iranian national was granted refugee status in March 2017. In 2019, he was sentenced to 2 years and 3 months' imprisonment for drug offenses. The Federal Office for Migration and Refugees revoked his refugee status in June 2020, refused to grant him subsidiary protection, and imposed a deportation ban with regard to Iran.

In July 2021, an expulsion measure and a three-year entry and residence ban were...

Germany

The Federal Administrative Court ruled on the consequences of the granting of refugee status by another EU Member State for the German asylum procedure, following the CJEU judgment in QY (C-753/22), and held that if a third-country national was granted refugee status in another Member State but cannot return there due to the risk of inhuman or degrading treatment, the administrative courts in an asylum procedure conducted in Germany must also fully consider the decision of the other Member State and the evidence on which this decision is based.

24/03/2025

|

DE: Federal Administrative Court [Bundesverwaltungsgericht]

|

Judgment

|

1 C 7.24, 1 C 5.24 and 1 C 6.24

Syrian nationals who were granted refugee status in Greece applied for international protection in Germany and they argued that they cannot return to Greece because they would face inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 4 of the EU Charter.

In Germany, the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) granted them subsidiary protection and rejected their applications for refugee...

Greece

The Council of State ruled by majority that the joint ministerial decision designating safe third countries should be annulled concerning the designation of Türkiye as safe third country for international protection applicants from Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Somalia. It unanimously ruled that the individual decisions of the Independent Appeals Committees rejecting requests for international protection of Afghani applicants on the grounds that they entered Greece from Türkiye, must be annulled.

27/02/2025

|

EL: Council of State [Συμβούλιο της Επικρατείας]

|

Judgment

|

The President of the Greek Council of State announced on 21 March 2025, that on 27 February 2025, the Plenary of the Council of State convened a conference on five cases relating to:

a) the establishment of a national list of safe third countries that includes Türkiye as a safe third country for applicants for international protection with a country of origin of Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh...

Council of Europe

The ECtHR found no violation of Sweden's positive obligations under Article 2 of the ECHR towards an Afghani asylum seeker with a worsening visual impairment and mental health problems who committed suicide two days after he received his negative asylum decision, due to lack of signs of mental distress or suicidal tendencies in the month preceding it and no immediate signs to render the attempt likely in the days prior.

06/03/2025

|

CoE: European Court of Human Rights [ECtHR]

|

Judgment

|

No 35950/20

An Afghan national and his brother arrived in Sweden as unaccompanied children and applied for asylum on 1 November 2015. The brother of the applicant in the proceedings before the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), A.H., had a visual impairment since birth and mental health problems.

The Migration Agency (Migrationsverket) assigned a municipality to be responsible for their...