The applicants, Kazakh nationals, submitted a request for international protection on grounds of being targeted by the authorities because of their Christian faith and of the husband’s role as a representative of the church. The City Court rejected their application, holding that restrictions on the freedom to manifest religion imposed by Kazakh legislation do not in themselves constitute grounds for granting international protection and are not sufficient to be regarded as persecution or serious harm, as it was found in the present case. The applicants appealed the decision on grounds that the Court had failed to consider sufficient evidence and relevant reports and country of origin information documenting the persecution of Christians in Kazakhstan. Additionally, the Court did not address the fact that the applicants would be at risk of persecution upon return because they had lodged an application for international protection abroad.

The Supreme Administrative Court considered country of origin information on Kazakhstan and found that the evidence points to persecution against representatives of Christian churches. It therefore ruled that the City Court did not sufficiently assess the situation of the applicant and the impact on the whole family and their grounds for applying for international protection. The Supreme Administrative Court annulled the decision of the City Court and referred the case back for further assessment.