No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Ilias and Ahmed v. Hungary
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 March 2025
Abstract
Aliens — Expulsion of aliens — States having right to expel aliens under international law — Applicants in transit zone seeking asylum in Hungary — Transit zone in Hungary on border with Serbia — Removal of applicants to Serbia — Removal of asylum seekers to third country without examination of asylum request on the merits — Duty of expelling State — Whether third country safe — Whether asylum procedures in third country adequate — Whether protecting against refoulement — Whether removal exposing asylum seekers to real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Duty of expelling State — Whether domestic remedies concerning expulsion ineffective — Whether conditions in transit zone amounting to inhuman or degrading treatment — Preliminary objections of respondent Government — Whether complaint concerning alleged lack of remedies outside six-month time limit — Objection to applicants’ victim status in relation to their removal to Serbia — Argument that respondent State acting in accordance with European Union law — Whether respondent State violating Article 3, Article 13 in conjunction with Article 3, and Article 5(1) and (4) of European Convention on Human Rights
Human rights — Prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment — Asylum seekers in transit zone — Transit zone in Hungary on border with Serbia — Applicants seeking asylum in Hungary — Applicants staying in transit zone in Hungary while awaiting outcome of asylum requests — Removal of applicants to Serbia — Removal of asylum seekers to third country without examination of asylum request on the merits — Duty of expelling State — Whether third country safe — Whether asylum procedures in third country adequate — Whether protecting against refoulement — Whether removal imputable to respondent State — Whether exposing applicants to real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether conditions in transit zone amounting to inhuman or degrading treatment — Whether respondent State violating Article 3 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950
Human rights — Right to liberty — Applicants in transit zone seeking asylum in Hungary — Transit zone in Hungary on border with Serbia — Applicants staying in transit zone in Hungary while awaiting outcome of asylum requests — Whether applicants’ confinement in transit zone constituting a de facto deprivation of liberty — Whether confinement in violation of Article 5(1) and (4) of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Whether Article 5 applicable — Whether applicants deprived of their liberty within meaning of Article 5 — Applicants’ individual situation and choices — Purpose of domestic legal regime applicable to transit zone — Nature and degree of actual restriction imposed on or experienced by applicants — Admissibility of applicants’ complaints under Article 5(1) and (4) of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950
Damages — Non-pecuniary damage — Finding of procedural violation of Article 3 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Article 41 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950
Keywords
- Type
- Case Report
- Information
- Copyright
- © Cambridge University Press & Assessment 2025