Administrative Court overrides negative finding with a Somali return decision
Supreme Administrative Court suspends a Somalian's negative decision in conjunction with expulsion order
Mr. A comes from Somalia und lodged an asylum application in July 2015. In its decision from July 2017 the Federal Asylum Office (FAO) rejected the application, did not grant subsidiary protection and concluded that the deportation to Somalia was permissible.
After he lodged an appeal on time, the Federal Asylum Court in its decision from August 2018 (FAC), rejected the appeal,without conducting a hearing.
Consequently, Mr. A appealed to the Supreme Administrative Court (SAC), which in its decision from December 2018, suspended the contested decision due to unlawfulness on grounds of violation of procedural regulations.
The SAC reasoned that the high court appeal was admissable and justified because the FAC deviated from the SAC case law, with regards to omitting a hearing. The prerequisites for the elimination of a hearing were not established. Mr. A. substantially countered the consideration of evidence and the statements of the FAO. As opposed to the FAO, the FAC utilized up to date country reports and supplemented its statements, which according to SAC case law requires a new hearing. The conditions for the omission of a hearing were not met. As the contested decision was held to be unlawful on grounds of violation of procedural regulations, it was suspended in the previously stated scope.