Journal

The formulation of the right to family life beyond ZAT & Others in recent UK jurisprudence

Date: 
Wednesday, June 15, 2016

Introduction

In ZAT and Others the Upper Tribunal affirmed the positive legal duty under Article 8 of the Convention on Human Rights on the State to admit four unaccompanied children to the territory in order to achieve family reunification with their siblings who had refugee status in the UK. The case firstly showed that family...

Allocating responsibility for an asylum application through Convention rights: The potential impact of ZAT & Others

Date: 
Thursday, March 3, 2016

This journal entry should be read in conjunction with the EDAL case summary available here, where a summary of the facts is also available.

Introduction:

The presence of migrant and refugee camps in northern France, on the edge of the Schengen zone and just 21 miles away from the UK has long been symbolic of the practical failings of the CEAS and in particular...

The Dublin System and the Right to an Effective Remedy – Observations on the preliminary references in the cases of C-155/15 – George Karim v Migrationsverket and C- 63/15 - Mehrdad Ghezelbash v Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie

Date: 
Tuesday, September 1, 2015

Introduction

The present article presents some observations on two similar cases pending before the CJEU. It offers some prospective thinking on the opportunity to expand the interpretation of the right to an effective remedy under the Dublin III Regulation (DRIII) - and to go beyond the Abdullahi ruling - as the evolution of the protection landscape after the adoption of the Dublin III Regulation increases procedural safeguards and rights for asylum seekers falling under its scope.  The note also explores the intrinsic links between the right to an effective remedy and...

Tarakhel v. Switzerland: Where does the Dublin system stand now?

Date: 
Thursday, December 4, 2014

This article is to be read in conjunction with the EDAL case summary

Introduction

On the 4th November the Grand Chamber provided its much anticipated judgment in Tarakhel v. Switzerland (no. 29217/12). The Court’s judgment, concerning the proposed return of a family to Italy under the Dublin Regulation, had been awaited with bated breath given a divide between domestic and European jurisprudence on whether return to Italy...

Mohammadi v. Austria - the issue of asylum detention in Hungary

Date: 
Wednesday, October 1, 2014

This article is to be read in conjunction with the EDAL Case Summary 

Introduction

In July the European Court of Human Rights examined a case concerning the transfer of an asylum seeker from Austria to Hungary under the Dublin II procedure. The Austrian Asylum Office, the Asylum Court and the Constitutional Court all rejected his asylum request and ordered his transfer to Hungary. Relying in particular on...

The Dublin system and the Right to an Effective Remedy– The case of C-394/12 Abdullahi

Date: 
Friday, December 13, 2013

This article is to be read in conjunction with the EDAL case summary.

Introduction

On 10 December 2013 the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued a preliminary reference ruling in case C-394/12 Abdullahi concerning the scope of Dublin appeals in situations where a Member State has agreed to take charge of an applicant for asylum under Art. 10(1)...

Pages