Latest News


Communicated cases against Norway (Application No. 569/20) and Hungary (Application No. 10940/17)

Date: 
Friday, April 3, 2020
  • Alleleh and Others v Norway (Application No. 569/20): The first applicant, Ms Alleleh, is a Djibouti national. The other applicants, her partner and 4 children, are Norwegian nationals. The first applicant applied for asylum in Norway in 2001 under the pretext of being a Somali national. Her request was rejected and she later married the second applicant in 2004.

Asady and Others v Slovakia: Removal of Afghan nationals did not amount to collective expulsion

Date: 
Tuesday, March 24, 2020

On 24 March 2020, the European Court of Human Rights published its judgment in the case of Asady and Others v Slovakia (Application No. 24917/15) concerning the removal of Afghan nationals from Slovakia to Ukraine.

Bilalova and Others v. Poland: Detention of child applicants violated Article 5 ECHR

Date: 
Wednesday, March 25, 2020

On 25 March 2020, the European Court of Human Rights published its judgment in the case of Bilalova and Others v Poland (Application No. 23685/14) concerning the detention of a woman and her five children.

Latest Cases


Keywords: Exclusion from protection , Date of Decision: 02-04-2020

Member States cannot merely refer to the existence of public order and security concerns under Article 72 TFEU, in order to derogate from their obligations under Title V without proving that it was necessary to do so. Such a derogation cannot be made unilaterally without any control by the European institutions. As the assessment of whether an applicant constitutes a danger to national security or public order should be thorough and individualised, in accordance with previous findings in C‑369/17 (Ahmed), Member States cannot invoke this provision in the context of general prevention but have to directly link it with a specific case.

Lastly, the spirit of solidarity and the binding nature of the Relocation Decisions do not allow Member States to derogate on the basis of a Member State’s own assessment of the effectiveness of the mechanism without suggesting a sound legal basis

Country of Applicant: Kosovo , Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Family unity (right to), Personal circumstances of applicant, Return , Date of Decision: 09-04-2019

It is necessary to make a proportionality assessment with consideration of both the gravity of the crime committed by the applicant and the interests of society, and the applicant’s individual rights, particularly his right to private and family life under Article 8.

The Federal Administrative Court failed to fully assess the impact that the measure of removal would have on the applicant. The evolution of the applicant's conduct since the occurrence of the crime, the applicant’s deteriorating medical condition, and his social, cultural and family ties in the host country were not sufficiently examined in the decision. The failure to assess the proportionality of the removal order and amounted to a violation of Article 8 of the Convention.

Country of Applicant: Unknown , Keywords: Discrimination, Integration measures, Refugee Status, Subsidiary Protection, Temporary protection , Date of Decision: 21-11-2018

Persons entitled to refugee protection should be accorded the same treatment regarding assistance as provided to nationals of the Member State. Article 29 Directive 2011/95 and Article 23 Geneva Convention do not make this treatment dependant on the length of the applicant’s stay in the Member State. 

A refugee may rely on the incompatibility of legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, with Article 29(1) of Directive 2011/95 before the national courts in order to remove the restriction on his rights provided for by that legislation.

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 (spapageorgopoulos@ecre.org).