Article 3 & Article 8 ECHR Medical Claims Post AM Zimbabwe and Paposhvili

Introduction

AM (Zimbabwe) [2020], affirmed the Article 3 medical threshold as that held in Paposhvili v Belgium and provided the Supreme Court’s interpretative steer which is now the test to follow when considering medical claims (Article 3).

There are two elements to determining an Article 3 medical claim:

• The substantive test; and
• The procedural obligations

These 2 elements are interlinked and must both be addressed in the evidence and legal submissions when making a claim that removal would be a breach of Article 3 on medical grounds.

This webinar will analyse the case law and the distinction between making an Article 8 and Article 3 claim. Consideration will also be given to the types of submissions and evidence required for a successful claim, making it ideal for practitioners who would like to improve this area of their immigration practice.

What You Will Learn

This webinar will cover the following:

• The background to AM and Paposhvili
• Further case law to reply upon
• The lower threshold for child medical cases
• Practical guidance on how to make a successful medical claim

This webinar was recorded on 13th September 2021