2. In this context, the applicant also relies on Article 2 of the Convention.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
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.
The applicant, Mr I.K. , is a Russian national who was born in 1976 and lives in Vienna . He was represented before the Court by Ms D. Einwallner , a lawyer practising in Vienna .
The applicant and his mother arrived in Austria in 2004. In 2007, both their asylum requests were dismissed. However, the applicant � s mother was subsequently granted asylum by the Asylum Court ( Asylgerichtshof ). The applicant had withdrawn his appeal after the oral appeal hearing.
The applicant � s subsequent asylum request was dismissed in 2011 as res iudicata .
Medical documentation dated 2011 showed that the applicant suffered from a severe depressiv e episode and suicide thoughts.
The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention that an expulsion to the Russian Federation would subject him to ill-treatment within the meaning of that provision in that he would be at a real risk of persecution by Russian security forces and in view of his impaired mental health status.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
BAILII · Verbatim mirror
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.