Hungary - Metropolitan Court, 15 October 2009, I.A.Z. v. Office of Immigration and Nationality, 21.K.31555/2009/6
Machine-found from the cited source, not yet confirmed by a human. Open the source before relying on it.
What was at stake
EDAL summary. The decision of the asylum authority was annulled on the basis that there was insufficient evidence that an internal protection alternative existed.
What happened
The applicant, from Somalia, experienced severe violence and persecution, including the killing of two of her children, rape, and robbery. She was forced to hide in a forest village with no protection or facilities, where she was exposed to further violence from armed groups. Her husband was also killed while she was in hiding.
What the court decided
The Metropolitan Court annulled the asylum authority's decision, finding it unlawful because the authority failed to identify a specific territory within Somalia where an internal protection alternative would be possible. The court ruled that the asylum authority breached its obligation by not collecting all relevant facts and evidence regarding the availability and location of such an alternative.
How the court got there
The court decided in favor of the applicant because the asylum authority failed to identify a specific territory within Somalia where an internal protection alternative would be possible. The authority breached its obligation by not collecting all relevant facts and evidence before making its decision. The court held that the asylum authority must indicate whether an internal protection alternative is available and, if so, in which specific territory of Somalia.
Statutes and cases cited
- § Refugee Convention art. 33
Categories
Authoritative link
This is a research and reference resource, not legal advice. Summaries are prepared from public sources and may be incomplete or out of date. Always read the original judgment or document and consult a qualified lawyer in the relevant jurisdiction before acting.
Narrative summaries on this page are licensed CC BY-NC 4.0. Reuse them with attribution to JusticeHub for non-commercial purposes. Original judgments and source documents remain under their own terms; follow the authoritative link for the source of record.