The asylum authorities had detained an unaccompanied asylum seeking child on the ground that it was in the interest of his own safety as he had taken part in fights with other asylum seekers at the reception centre. However, the court repealed the detention order highlighting that detention should be a measure of last resort. The court noted that the child had not been heard during the administrative procedure and neither his legal representative, nor a social worker had taken part in the procedure.
Sources Archives: Case-law
Case No. 4420/2011 before the Sofia City Administrative Court, Ruling No. 2263 of 25 May 2011
On 18/01/2022 in
The Court ordered unconditional release from detention of an accompanied migrant child. The case was initiated using the remedy of defence against factual unlawful action (detention). The court accepted the complaint that the permissible period of the minor’s detention (3 months) had passed and therefore the child’s detention lacked any legal basis.
UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), A.L. v Spain, Communication 016/2017, Adoption of views, 31 May 2019
On 21/10/2021 in
The Committee recalls that the assessment of the age of a young person who claims to be a minor is of fundamental importance, as the outcome determines whether that person will be entitled to or excluded from national protection as a child. Similarly, the enjoyment of the rights set out in the Convention flows from that determination. It is therefore imperative that there be due process to assess a person’s age, as well as the opportunity to challenge the outcome through an appeals process. While that process is underway, the person should be given the benefit of the doubt and treated as a child. The best interests of the child should be a primary consideration throughout the age determination process.
N.B.F. v Spain, Communication No. 11/2017, 27 September 2018
On 21/10/2021 in
The Committee recalls that the assessment of the age of a young person who claims to be a minor is of fundamental importance, as the outcome determines whether that person will be entitled to or excluded from national protection as a child. Similarly, the enjoyment of the rights set out in the Convention flows from that determination. It is therefore imperative that there be due process to assess a person’s age, as well as the opportunity to challenge the outcome through an appeals process. While that process is underway, the person should be given the benefit of the doubt and treated as a child. The best interests of the child should be a primary consideration throughout the age determination process.
Source:
R.K. v. Spain, Communication No. 27/2017, 18 September 2019
On 21/10/2021 in
The Committee recalls that the assessment of the age of a young person who claims to be a minor is of fundamental importance, as the outcome determines whether that person will be entitled to or excluded from national protection as a child. Similarly, the enjoyment of the rights set out in the Convention flows from that determination. It is therefore imperative that there be due process to assess a person’s age, as well as the opportunity to challenge the outcome through an appeals process. While that process is under way, the person should be given the benefit of the doubt and treated as a child. The best interests of the child should be a primary consideration throughout the age determination process.
Source:
CJEU, M.A. v Belgium, Case no. C-112/20, 11 March 2021
On 21/10/2021 in
This decision concerns a request for a preliminary ruling on the interpretation of article 5 of Directive 2008/115/EC of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals (the Return Directive). The CJEU found that the child’s best interests principle applies also to decisions which are not addressed directly to a minor but have significant consequences for them.