Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
Austria
Country of Decision : Austria
Court Name : AT: Federal Administrative Court [Bundesverwaltungsgericht - BVwG]
Date of decision : 13/03/2020
Type :
ECLI : AT:BVWG:2020:W144.2229518.1.00
Case Number/Citation/ Document Symbol : W144 2229518-1

Applicants (Nigeria) v Austrian Federal Office for Immigration and Asylum (Bundesamt für Fremdenwesen und Asyl- BFA)

Nigeria

AT: The Federal Administrative Court decided on Dublin transfer to Italy in the light of the COVID-19 pandemic in February/March 2020

The applicants are a Nigerian mother and her two children, all three of Nigerian nationality. The case concerned the Dublin transfer of the applicants to Italy, in the light of the COVID-19 pandemic worsening in Italy. The first applicant, the mother, expressed her wish to return to Nigeria rather than go to Italy, as it had been more than 10 years since she was going from one country to another.

The court referred the case back to the Federal Office for Immigration and Asylum (BFA), as it found that the general assessment of the situation in Italy - not mentioning and assessing the developments in the country due to the COVID-19 pandemic - is not sufficient to uphold that the transfer is possible in this individual case.

The case was decided before the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in Austria.

Dublin procedure; Nigeria;

Dublin Regulation III (Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for IP); European Convention on Human Rights;

EASO Networks

Austria, Federal Administrative Court [Bundesverwaltungsgericht - BVwG], Applicants (Nigeria) v Austrian Federal Office for Immigration and Asylum (Bundesamt für Fremdenwesen und Asyl- BFA), W144 2229518-1, AT:BVWG:2020:W144.2229518.1.00, 13 March 2020. Link redirects to the English summary in the EASO Case Law Database.

https://caselaw.easo.europa.eu/pages/viewcaselaw.aspx?CaseLawID=1439