Latest News

C-507/19: CJEU interprets Article 12(1)(a) QD as referring to ‘effective access to territory’

Wednesday, January 13, 2021

On 13 January 2021, the CJEU ruled, in case C-507/19 Bundesrepublik Deutschland v XT, on the interpretation of Article 12 of the Qualification Directive (Directive 2011/95).

C-441/19: CJEU delivers judgment concerning return decisions and the investigation into adequate reception facilities for unaccompanied minors in the State of return

Thursday, January 14, 2021

On 14 January 2021, the CJEU published its judgment in TQ v Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid (State Secretary for Justice and Security) (C-441/19) concerning the interpretation of, inter alia, Article 6(1) and Article 8(1) of the Return Directive (

Communicated cases against Greece (application no. 19614/20) and the Netherlands (application no. 64534/19)

Monday, January 18, 2021
  • A.B v Greece (application no. 19614/20) concerns the living conditions of a pregnant woman in the Pyli hotspot on the island of Kos.

Latest Cases

Country of Applicant: Sri Lanka

This appeal considered what the correct approach is to the assessment of medical evidence in asylum claims alleging torture. Hence, it was declared that decision-makers can receive assistance from medical experts who are able to offer an opinion about the injury inflicted. The Supreme Court unanimously allowed the appeal and remitted KV’s appeal against the refusal of asylum to the Upper Tribunal for fresh determination.  

Country of Applicant: Pakistan
This case dealt with the issue of the whether the guidance of MN and others Pakistan CG [2012] was still accurate in terms of asylum protection due to failing to ask the question of why an individual would act in a discreet way in their country of origin. This question draws the distinction between concealment of faith due to fear of persecution or simply due to social norms or personal preference.
WA sought to challenge the correctness of the guidance in MN and others Pakistan CG [2012] in that it failed to properly reflect the judgement of HJ (Iran) test of asking why an individual would act in a particular way to avoid persecutory harm in their country of origin. The unanimous judgement allowed the appeal and remitted the case back for a hearing. 
Country of Applicant: United Kingdom

The High Court granted an order under section 4 of the Human Rights Act 1998 that the scheme of “Right to Rent” set out in sections 20-37 of the Immigration Act 2014 was incompatible with ECHR rights, along with a further order that it could not be extended beyond England without a further evaluation. 

About EDAL

The European Database of Asylum Law (EDAL) is an online database managed by the European Council on Refugees and Exiles (ECRE) and a compilation of summaries of refugee and asylum case law from the courts of 22 European states, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). The summaries are published in English and in the relevant state’s national language.

For more information please see here.

If you are interested in contributing an article on a relevant subject to the EDAL blog or would like to inform us about an important national judgment, please kindly send an email to Stavros Papageorgopoulos (