Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
This judgment will become final in the circumstances set out in Article 44 § 2 of the Convention. It may be subject to editorial revision.
Ganna Yudkivska, President, Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque, Faris Vehabović, Egidijus Kūris, Georges Ravarani, Marko Bošnjak, Péter Paczolay, judges, and Andrea Tamietti, Deputy Section Registrar,
A. Events in the Chechen Republic and the applicants' first attempts to enter into Poland
. In April 2017 the applicants left Chechnya and went to Belarus with the aim of crossing into Poland. They submitted that they had attempted to lodge asylum applications several times on the Polish border, but each time the border guards had refused to accept their applications and returned them to Belarus (see M.A. and Others v. Poland , no. 42902/17 , Statement of Facts and Questions to the Parties; see also paragraphs 22-26 below for further events and the applicants' eventual acceptance into Poland).
. On 16 April 2017, around noon, the applicants arrived at the Medininkai checkpoint on the border between Lithuania and Belarus. They submitted to the Court that they had told the border guards in Russian that they were seeking asylum, but asylum proceedings had not been initiated.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.