Hungary - Metropolitan Court, 22 April 2011, 17.K30.864/2010/18
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 applicant could not substantiate the individual elements of his claim with respect to his well-founded fear of a blood feud; however, he was able to satisfy the criteria for subsidiary protection....
What the court decided
The Metropolitan Court held that the applicant could not substantiate a well‑founded fear of a blood feud and therefore did not qualify for refugee status, but he satisfied the criteria for subsidiary protection because the indiscriminate violence in Ghazni province posed a serious and individual threat to his life, and internal protection was not reasonably available; consequently the court overturned the OIN decision and granted subsidiary protection.
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 Summaries are prepared from public sources and may be incomplete or out of date.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.