France: National Court of Asylum must take into account all provided documents and must motivate reasons to set a document aside. Summary of the decision in English here: https://t.co/yaa8FHRmpH pic.twitter.com/0mFmWf02hy— EDAL (@EDAL_EU) July 18, 2018
France: National Court of Asylum must take into account all provided documents and must motivate reasons to set a document aside
On 21 June 2018, the French Council of State ruled
in case no. 413978 concerning an Armenian couple whose asylum
applications were rejected by the French Office for the Protection of
Refugees and Stateless Persons (OFPRA) and whose appeals were rejected
by the National Court of Asylum.
The Council of State recalled that the National Court of Asylum, when assessing the credibility of the claims submitted by an asylum applicant, must take into account all the documents provided by the applicant. In particular, where the applicant submits documents that contain detailed information relating to his account, it is incumbent on the court, after assessing the probative value of the document in relation to the facts as put forward by the applicant, to assess the risks which they are likely to reveal and, where appropriate, to motivate the elements that lead the Court to disregard those risks.
In this case, the Council of State found that the National Court of Asylum had erred in disregarding the medical reports submitted to it in relation to the injuries and traumas suffered by the applicants and consistent with their account of the facts, without justifying the reasons to set the documents aside. Therefore, the Council of State sent the case back to the National Court of Asylum for a new decision.
The Council of State recalled that the National Court of Asylum, when assessing the credibility of the claims submitted by an asylum applicant, must take into account all the documents provided by the applicant. In particular, where the applicant submits documents that contain detailed information relating to his account, it is incumbent on the court, after assessing the probative value of the document in relation to the facts as put forward by the applicant, to assess the risks which they are likely to reveal and, where appropriate, to motivate the elements that lead the Court to disregard those risks.
In this case, the Council of State found that the National Court of Asylum had erred in disregarding the medical reports submitted to it in relation to the injuries and traumas suffered by the applicants and consistent with their account of the facts, without justifying the reasons to set the documents aside. Therefore, the Council of State sent the case back to the National Court of Asylum for a new decision.
Interessant artikel? Deel het eens met uw netwerk en help mee met het verspreiden van de bekendheid van dit blog. Er staan wellicht nog meer artikelen op dit weblog die u zullen boeien. Kijk gerust eens rond. Zelf graag wat willen plaatsen? Mail dan webmaster@vreemdelingenrecht.com In verband met geldwolven die denken geld te kunnen claimen op krantenartikelen die op een blog als deze worden geplaatst maar na meestal een dag voor de krantenlezers aan leeswaardigheid hebben ingeboet terwijl wij vreemdelingenrecht specialisten ze soms wel nog jaren gebruiken om er een kopie van te maken voor een zaak ga ik over tot het plaatsen van alleen het eerste stukje. Ja ik weet het: de kans dat u doorklikt is geringer dan wanneer het hele artikel hier staat en een kopie van het orgineel maken handig kan zijn voor uw zaak. Wilt u zelf wat overnemen van dit weblog. Dat mag. Zet er alleen even een link bij naar het desbetreffende artikel zodat mensen niet alleen dat wat u knipt en plakt kunnen lezen maar dat ook kunnen doen in de context. Subscribe to Vreemdelingenrecht.com blog by Email
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten