The applicant, a minor Somali national, applied for asylum and invoked a risk of forced marriage upon return. The FIS rejected the asylum request but granted subsidiary protection and a 4-year residence permit based on it. The FIS noted a report submitted by the applicant but did not find credible his allegations related to his uncle trying to force him to marry and the help received from his aunt to leave the country when finding about the forced marriage. Before the FIS, the applicant did not have a legal assistant at the interview. The applicant submitted an appeal and the Administrative Court rejected it, along with the request for an oral hearing.

The Administrative Court assessed the credibility of the details in the report submitted and the statements of the applicant at the interview before the determining authority and rejected it. The applicant appealed further before the Supreme Administrative Court.

The Supreme Administrative Court reiterated all international conventions related to the protection of the rights of the child along with the principle of best interest of the child, along with the EU acquis on the subject matter. It found further that based on updated country of origin information women in Somalia that refuse to have an arranged marriage are at risk of being subject to violence. The Supreme Administrative Court noted also that the applicant submitted a detailed report and that all information in the case is relevant to state that the best interest of the child shall be taken into account and concludes that the FIS and Administrative Court decisions must be annulled. The case was referred back to the FIS for re-examination and a new investigation in light of the updated country of origin reports and the best interest of the child.