This decision concerns a request for a preliminary ruling on the interpretation of the second paragraph of article 6 of Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 (the Dublin II Regulation). The CJEU found that the child’s best interests must be a primary consideration in all decisions adopted by the Member States on the basis of the referred norm.
Sources Archives: Case-law
Kanagaratnam and Others v. Belgium, ECtHR, Application no. 15297/09, Judgment of 13 December 2011
ECtHR decision on the detention of a mother with her three children in a closed center for four months. The family had been refouled after applying for asylum at the border at Brussels Zaventem airport. The European Court of Human Rights condemned Belgium on the basis of articles 3 and 5 § 1 of the Convention.
Decision n° 166/2013 of 19 December 2013, Constitutional Court (Belgium)
Decision of the Constitutional Court on the action for annulment brought by a coalition of associations on the legality of article 74/9 of the law of 15 December 1980. The Court confirmed the legality of this article and clarified its scope, finding that the detention did not violate the child’s fundamental rights, including the right to family life and to protection from all forms of inhuman or degrading treatment.
Decision n° 251.051 of 24 June 2021, Council of State (Belgium)
Final decision of the Council of State on the action for suspension and annulment brought by a coalition of associations after the publication of the Royal Decree of 22 July 2018 establishing the modalities of detention of families in migration. The Council of State decides to maintain the provision that allows the deprivation of liberty of families for a maximum period of 4 weeks and declares itself not competent to pronounce on the concrete measures for the functioning of the family homes.
Mubilanzila Mayeka and Kaniki Mitunga v. Belgium, ECtHR, Application No. 13178/03, Judgment of 12 October 2006
Rahimi v. Greece, ECtHR, Application No. 8687/08, Judgment of 5 April 2011
“The ECtHR case Rahimi v Greece concerns the violation of articles 3, 5 § 1 (f), 5 § 4 and 13 ECHR, in a case of a migrant child from Afghanistan, and was decided by the Court on 05 April 2011.”