The case concerned an Iraqi applicant with a mental disability whose application for international protection was rejected. The applicant contested the negative decision before the Administrative Court of Athens by invoking the incorrect interpretation of legislative provisions and lack of reasoning, alleging that the determining authority did not take into consideration his disability and the poor health system in his country of origin.

The Athens Administrative Court of Appeal rejected his appeal as unfounded and noted that the deficiencies in the health system are not related to a refusal by the state authorities of his country of origin to provide him with medical treatment, but to the weaknesses of the system. The court stated that there was no ground to grant him refugee status since his statements did not indicate a fear of individual persecution as provided for in the Geneva Convention. As for subsidiary protection, the court found that the conditions were not met and that the harm caused by a deterioration in his state of health in case of removal had been accepted, not disputed by the applicant, and it would be due to inadequacies of the health system. The court concluded that there was no evidence to demonstrate that the health system in Iraq is in such a state that the applicant would suffer a deterioration that would constitute torture or inhuman or degrading treatment. Moreover, the differences in the level of health care systems between Greece and Iraq do not represent by themselves an infringement of Article 3 ECHR and Articles 4 and 19 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The court assessed that there was no need to refer the file to the competent authority to examine it under humanitarian grounds.

On the principle of non-refoulement invoked by the applicant, the court stated that the claim was unfounded because there was no risk upon return to his country of origin to be subject to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment. In addition, the contested decision did not contain an enforceable removal order, and according to the legislation on third-country nationals, the removal was prohibited in case of a breach of Article 3 ECHR. The applicant would be able to appeal a removal decision contrary to the non-refoulement principle and invoke all arguments in that procedure.