EUAA Case Law Database

Latest news for users

*** Please fill in this survey to evaluate the EUAA Case Law Database and suggest improvements. We welcome your feedback!

*** Recent EUAA publications on asylum jurisprudence:

Jurisprudence related to asylum pronounced by the Court of Justice of the EU in 2024 (April 2025)
EUAA Quarterly Overview of Asylum Case Law, Issue 1/2025 for asylum judgments from December 2024 to February 2025. To receive the Quarterly by email, please subscribe here.
Jurisprudence related to Gender-Based Violence against Women. Analysis of asylum case law from 2020-2024 (Feb 2025)
Jurisprudence on Material Reception Conditions in Asylum - Sanctions, Reductions and Withdrawals (Nov 2024)
Jurisprudence on the Application of the Temporary Protection Directive (Oct 2024)

The EUAA Information and Analysis Sector can provide, upon request, online sessions on how to use the EUAA Case Law Database. We also provide presentations on the latest jurisprudence interpreting the Common European Asylum System. For more information, contact us at [email protected]

Get our Quarterly Overview of Asylum Case Law

Click here to subscribe

Read our publications

Latest updates View all

30/04/2025

EU: The CJEU ruled that, when deciding on exclusion from international protection under Article 12(2)(b) of the recast Qualification Directive, Member States must take into account if the applicant already served the sentence; however, this is merely an aspect among others to be considered and it does not, in itself, prevent that applicant from being excluded from refugee status.

K. L., a third country national who crossed the border between Belarus and Lithuania on 17 February 2022, applied for asylum in Lithuania. He claimed that he was illegally convicted three times in his country of origin, because of his political opposition activity and that he had left his country when the law enforcement authorities began questioning other individuals as he was convinced that they...

03/04/2025

EU: The CJEU ruled that Article 46(3) of the recast Asylum Procedures Directive, read in the light of Article 47 of the EU Charter and Article 4(3) of the TEU, must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to satisfy the requirement of a full and ex nunc examination, a national court of first instance hearing an action against a negative asylum decision must have the power to order a medical examination of the asylum applicant, where the court considers that the use of that examination is necessary or relevant for the purposes of assessing that application.

B.F., a Lebanese national, requested international protection in Cyprus on 4 September 2018. The applicant claimed that he had been the victim of torture by the Lebanese intelligence agencies and military services due to...

27/03/2025

EU: The CJEU ruled that Article 10(1)(d) of the recast Qualification Directive must be interpreted as meaning that an asylum applicant targeted by a blood feud in the country of origin for being a member of a family involved in a property dispute may not, for that sole reason, be regarded as belonging to a ‘particular social group’; however, national authorities must determine whether the applicant qualifies for subsidiary protection, as serious harm covers a real threat to the applicant of being killed or subjected to acts of violence inflicted by a member of his or her family or community.

A N, an Afghan national and an ethnic Pashtun from the Province of Laghman (Afghanistan), requested international protection in Austria on 4 November 2015, claiming that he was at risk...

16/04/2025

DE: The Federal Administrative Court ruled that asylum applications lodged by single, employable and non-vulnerable beneficiaries of international protection in Greece can be rejected as inadmissible in Germany, as their living conditions upon a transfer back to Greece would not amount to inhuman or degrading treatment as provided in Article 4 of the EU Charter.

The applicants are a 34-year-old man born in the North of Gaza and a 32-year-old national of Somalia national who were provided refugee protection in Greece and subsequently left for Germany where they applied for asylum. The Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) rejected their asylum applications as inadmissible, with a threat of being transferred back to Greece. On appeal, the Higher Administrative Court dismissed...

02/04/2025

ES: The Supreme Court ruled that, ideally, the administrative file should include formal proof that the application for international protection was communicated to the UNHCR and that the UNHCR received it, allowing it to carry out its responsibilities at the meeting of the Interministerial Committee on Asylum and Refuge (CIAR).

The applicants are a couple from Colombia and their minor daughter. On 30 July 2020, their request for international protection was rejected by the Ministry of the Interior because their claims did not fall under Articles 3 and 4 of the Law 12/2009 on Asylum. The applicants appealed the decision before the National High Court (Audiencia Nacional). On 12 December 2022, the court rejected the appeal and agreed with the Ministry that the substantive conditions for...

11/04/2025

NL: The Council of State ruled that the Minister for Asylum and Migration is not required to address every individual circumstance in the intention phase of the Dublin procedure, as long as all essential considerations are included and individual circumstances are sufficiently dealt with in the final decision. The council also found no systemic deficiencies in the reception system in France and considered that the pregnancy of one of the applicants did not preclude the Dublin transfer, as France has adequate procedures and safeguards in place for vulnerable individuals, including access to maternity care.

The applicants (parents and their minor child), applied for international protection on 19 November 2023 in the Netherlands. The Dutch Minister for Asylum and Migration refused to...