CASE OF S.H. v. MALTA (no. 37241/21)
What was at stake
Whether the applicant's proposed expulsion to Bangladesh would expose him to a real risk of torture and deprive him of an effective remedy, contrary to the prohibition of torture and the right to an effective remedy.
What the court decided
The Court held that the applicant's removal to Bangladesh would place him at a real risk of torture, breaching the prohibition of torture, and that the domestic system failed to provide an effective remedy, violating the right to an effective remedy; it also awarded the applicant non‑pecuniary damages.
Categories
This is a research and reference resource, not legal advice. Summaries are prepared from public sources and may be incomplete or out of date. Always read the original judgment or document and consult a qualified lawyer in the relevant jurisdiction before acting.
Narrative summaries on this page are licensed CC BY-NC 4.0. Reuse them with attribution to JusticeHub for non-commercial purposes. Original judgments and source documents remain under their own terms; follow the authoritative link for the source of record.