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.
Transfer and stay at police headquarters of a group of immigrants with a view to identifying and deporting unlawful residents: violation
Law - Articles 2 and 3: The applicant had been granted refugee status and was no longer at risk of deportation to Syria and could therefore not claim to be a victim of violations of his rights under those Articles.
Article 13 in conjunction with Articles 2 and 3: The applicant�s complaints under Articles 2 and 3 had been arguable, so he could rely on Article 13. Although the decision to grant him refugee status had removed the risk that he would be deported, it had not acknowledged and afforded redress for his claim that the judicial-review proceedings were ineffective. He could therefore still claim to be a �victim� in respect of that complaint.
(See in this connection Gebremedhin [Gaberamadhien] v. France , no. 25389/05 , 26 April 2007, Information Note 96; and De Souza Ribeiro v. France [GC], no. 22689/07 , 13 December 2012, Information Note 158)
Article 5 � 1: In order to evaluate the lawfulness of the applicant�s detention, the Court identified three distinct stages.
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.