Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
17/05/2023
BE: The Ghent Labour Court annulled a decision of Fedasil requesting an asylum applicant to leave the reception centre considering the person's income, holding that further information and assistance should be provided to the person in order to avoid a risk of homelessness.

ECLI
Input Provided By
EUAA IDS
Other Source/Information
Type
Judgment
Original Documents
Relevant Legislative Provisions
National law only (in case there is no reference to EU law/ECHR)
Reference
Belgium, Labour Tribunal [Tribunal du travail/Arbeidsrechtbanken], Applicant v Federal Agency for the Reception of Asylum Seekers (Fedasil), No 22/790/A, 17 May 2023. Link redirects to the English summary in the EUAA Case Law Database.
Permanent link to the case
https://caselaw.euaa.europa.eu/pages/viewcaselaw.aspx?CaseLawID=3457
Case history
Other information
Abstract

The applicant submitted an application for international protection on 13 November 2020, which is still pending before the Commissioner General for Refugees and Stateless Persons. On 3 November 2020, a mandatory place of registration was assigned to the applicant, liftyed on 23 November 2022 by Fedasil as the applicant had been working as an employee on Belgian territory for more than 6 months and his total remuneration was higher than that of the living wage. The applicant had to leave the reception facility (collective shelter) no later than the first working day following 25 December 2022. The applicant contested this decision claiming an inability to find a private accommodation, which he had been looking for in vain since February 2022. In the meantime the deadline for departure was extended several times.


The court noted that there was no evidence that Fedasil assisted the claimant in the transition to social services and that the information provided to the applicant was insufficient regarding the services provided by the CPAS. The court also rejected Fedasil’s argument that the applicant kept the income hidden, noting that it might not have been clear to the person that the information needed to be passed to the authorities in a specific way. The court also noted that the objective of accelerating the flow of the beneficiaries of material aid does not take into account the need to find a suitable home within the month following the notification of the contested decision, all the more because it was not shown that the person concerned is effectively supervised so that they do not become homeless. The court observed that charging an the person a contribution, taking into account the income of the person, for the stay in a reception structure, pending the possibility of obtaining private residence, was a more appropriate measure. Thus, the court annulled the contested decision.


Country of Decision
Belgium
Court Name
BE: Labour Tribunal [Tribunal du travail/Arbeidsrechtbanken]
Case Number
No 22/790/A
Date of Decision
17/05/2023
Country of Origin
Unknown
Keywords
Access to information/Provision of information
Reception/Accommodation
Source
agii.be