CASE OF S.J. v. BELGIUM (no. 70055/10)
What was at stake
Whether the applicant's expulsion to Nigeria would expose him to a real risk of treatment contrary to the prohibition of torture, and whether he had an effective remedy to challenge that risk.
What the court decided
The Court held that the applicant’s expulsion to Nigeria would not expose him to a real risk of torture, thus there was no violation of the prohibition of torture. However, it found a violation of the right to an effective remedy in conjunction with that prohibition, dismissing the pecuniary damage claim and treating the finding of a violation as sufficient for non‑pecuniary damage.
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 Summaries are prepared from public sources and may be incomplete or out of date.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.