B and C v Switzerland
European Court of Human Rights · Applications nos. 889/19 and 43987/16 · 17 November 2020 · Council of Europe
Key principle
Article 3 assessment in SOGI removal cases must engage individually with state AND non-state persecution and with the actual effectiveness of protection.
Facts
A gay man faced removal to The Gambia after Swiss authorities rejected his asylum claim. The Court examined the risk of ill-treatment on return.
Legal questions
Did removal violate Article 3 given the applicant's sexual orientation and the risk of persecution by both state and non-state actors?
Holding
Removal would violate Article 3. State authorities had failed to conduct a sufficiently rigorous assessment of risks arising from both state and non-state actors and the availability of state protection.
Practical relevance
Important ECtHR authority on rigorous individualised risk assessment.
Limitations
The judgment turns on the specific evidentiary record; it does not decide the merits of the underlying asylum claim.
General information only. ImmigrationLGBT is not a law firm and this summary is not personalised legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer or accredited representative in the relevant jurisdiction. Legal status and subsequent treatment of the decision may have changed.