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.
04/06/2026
|
EU: Court of Justice of the European Union [CJEU]
|
Judgment
|
C-621/24
EU: Court of Justice of the European Union [CJEU]
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, F.B., an Afghan national, had his international protection application rejected as inadmissible by the...
|
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.
04/06/2026
|
EU: Court of Justice of the European Union [CJEU]
|
Judgment
|
C-440/25
EU: Court of Justice of the European Union [CJEU]
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 parents and six children, several being girls. They cited three main grounds to substantiate their request for international protection: (i) issues with a neighbour, fear of a vendetta and the daughters being forced into marriage; (ii) fear of circumcision of the daughters; and (iii) the daughters...
|
26/05/2026
|
CoE: European Court of Human Rights [ECtHR]
|
Judgment
|
No 54796/16
CoE: European Court of Human Rights [ECtHR]
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...
|
21/05/2026
|
BE: Constitutional Court [Cour constitutionnelle]
|
Judgment
|
66/2026
BE: Constitutional Court [Cour constitutionnelle]
Twenty applications were sent to the Constitutional Court in October 2025, requesting the annulment and suspension of the Law of 14 July 2025 which modified the Law of 15 December 1980 on access to territory, residence, and removal of third country nationals, as well as Articles 2, 4 and 5 of the Law of 12 January 2007 on the reception of asylum applicants and other categories of aliens. The first contested measures allowed Fedasil to limit or withdraw the right to material assistance when a...
|
20/05/2026
|
IT: Court of Appeal [Corte di Appello]
|
Order
|
R.G.3085/2026
IT: Court of Appeal [Corte di Appello]
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 No 286/1998. That detention order was validated by the Magistrate of Melfi on 10 April 2026. On 22 April 2026, the Moroccan national expressed his intention to apply for international protection. On the same day, the Questore of...
|
13/05/2026
|
NL: Council of State [Afdeling Bestuursrechtspraak van de Raad van State]
|
Referral for a preliminary ruling
|
Judgment 202303560/1/V3
NL: Council of State [Afdeling Bestuursrechtspraak van de Raad van State]
Referral for a preliminary ruling
A Venezuelan national applied for international protection. His request was declared inadmissible by the Minister for Asylum and Migration (formerly the State Secretary for Justice and Security) on 6 December 2022 on the basis of Article 30a(1)(c) of the Vw 2000, which transposed Article 33(2) and (c) of the recast Asylum Procedures Directive (APD). Ecuador, where he had previously resided for 6 years, was considered to be a safe third country for the applicant. The minister also issued a...
|
07/05/2026
|
EU: Court of Justice of the European Union [CJEU]
|
Judgment
|
C-747/22
EU: Court of Justice of the European Union [CJEU]
According to the CJEU press release:
"A beneficiary of subsidiary protection, who had been lawfully resident in Italy since 2011, was receiving ‘citizens' income', a social benefit coupled with measures for occupational and social integration. The grant of that assistance was subject to a condition that the beneficiary have resided in Italy for a minimum of 10 years, the last 2 years of which had to have been continuous.
Following an administrative...
|
06/05/2026
|
FR: National Court of Asylum [Cour Nationale du Droit d'Asile (CNDA)]
|
Decision
|
25048485 C+
FR: National Court of Asylum [Cour Nationale du Droit d'Asile (CNDA)]
A., a national of Sudan from the State of Sennar (Sinja), of Berti ethnicity, requested international protection in France, claiming that he feared being exposed to persecution or serious harm if returned to his country of origin, on the one hand, because of a private conflict between him and shepherds. He claimed that he was arrested and detained by known shepherds after his flock was stolen. On the other hand, he claimed that he feared persecution or serious harm because of the Sudanese...
|
05/05/2026
|
DE: Higher Administrative Court (Oberverwaltungsgericht/Verwaltungsgerichtshöf)
|
Referral for a preliminary ruling
|
2 LC 44/25
DE: Higher Administrative Court (Oberverwaltungsgericht/Verwaltungsgerichtshöf)
Referral for a preliminary ruling
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 serious crime, the Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) revoked the applicant's subsidiary protection status by decision of 3 February...
|
28/04/2026
|
FR: National Court of Asylum [Cour Nationale du Droit d'Asile (CNDA)]
|
Judgment
|
No 25029283 C+
FR: National Court of Asylum [Cour Nationale du Droit d'Asile (CNDA)]
M., a national of Zimbabwe, requested international protection in France, claiming that, if returned to her country of origin, she feared being exposed to persecution or serious harm by the Zimbabwean civil society and law enforcement authorities on account of her sexual orientation. The applicant claimed that as an adolescent she had a relationship with a woman and after being blackmailed by her cousin, she informed her family about her sexual orientation, which led to the funding of her...
|
28/04/2026
|
FI: Supreme Administrative Court [Korkein hallinto-oikeus]
|
Judgment
|
KHO:2026:27
FI: Supreme Administrative Court [Korkein hallinto-oikeus]
A., a Somalian national applied for international protection in Finland, citing a threat of female genital mutilation/cutting (FGM/C) by the family of the father of her then unborn child. The applicant reiterated the same grounds during her interview, after her daughter was born in Finland. The Finnish Immigration Service rejected the application for A. and her child and ordered their removal to Somalia. The applicants' appeal was further dismissed by the administrative court, who found...
|
28/04/2026
|
CoE: European Court of Human Rights [ECtHR]
|
Decision
|
No 37336/23
CoE: European Court of Human Rights [ECtHR]
According to the press release of 21 May 2026:
"Principal facts
The applicant is a Tunisian national who was born in 1983. He claimed to have arrived in Belgium on...
|
27/04/2026
|
NO: Court of Appeal [Lagmannsrettane]
|
Judgment
|
LB-2025-187515
NO: Court of Appeal [Lagmannsrettane]
A., a Somali national of Hilibi ethnic background, requested international protection in Norway arguing that she had been stopped and mistreated by men affiliated with the Islamist movement al-Shabaab after she had danced at a wedding, which the men believed was against their culture and religion. She stated that she was threatened by them. The Norwegian Directorate of Immigration (UDI) rejected A.'s application on 26 June 2017. The UDI did not take a position...
|
26/04/2026
|
FI: Supreme Administrative Court [Korkein hallinto-oikeus]
|
Judgment
|
KHO:2026:25
FI: Supreme Administrative Court [Korkein hallinto-oikeus]
A., a Ukrainian national, has resided in Finland since 2014 holding several residence permits. In January 2018, the Police Department recommended the deportation of the applicant on grounds that he has committed crimes. In September 2018, the Finnish Immigration Service decided not to deport him, but it mentioned to reconsider the removal if the applicant would be convicted of crimes in the future. In November 2020, the Finnish Immigration Service decided not to extend the applicant's...
|
23/04/2026
|
LV: District Administrative Court [Administratīvā rajona tiesa]
|
Judgment
|
A420007926
LV: District Administrative Court [Administratīvā rajona tiesa]
A., a 19-year-old Ukrainian-born applicant who was naturalised as Russian at the age of 6, had been living in Latvia since 2014, and without a valid identity document since 2021. On 20 May 2025, the applicant requested international protection, submitting that due to his origin he faced discrimination while living in Russia, including denial of access to education. He based his application for international protection on political grounds, stating that he had opposed the war in Ukraine on...
|
 | Loading… |
     |