The case concerns the validity of five administrative decisions for five asylum seekers, all of whom were rejected for an application for protection and stay on humanitarian grounds. The main question is whether the decisions are based on the wrong fact when it comes to the age of the five applicants. The key is whether the applicants should be treated as children. Only the age rating is invoked as the ground of invalidity, they have all five waived other statements. The parties disagree as to which evidence requirements apply to the age rating. A special question is also to what extent the medical age surveys can provide guidance in the age assessment. There have also been objections to the case processing, including that medical age surveys were made.