Toward the end of 2020, the cour administrative d'appel de Bordeaux (administrative court of appeals in Bordeaux) issued a judgment on an asylum claim that substantively took environmental pollution into account when making its determination that the asylum seeker could not be returned to Bangladesh because of medical conditions exacerbated by the air quality there. The judgment [3] is currently only available in French, but a helpful commentary has been provided by the UK Human Rights blog [4]. According to that piece, the asylum seeker is a Bangladeshi national, suffering from severe respiratory conditions, who applied for asylum in France, after his temporary residence permit expired. After being denied asylum and residence, an administrative tribunal in Toulouse reversed his removal order. This reversal was challenged by the authorities at the Bordeaux Court. In rejecting the appeal, the Court reminded the parties of the "circumstances under which a foreign national, suffering from a medical condition, normally living in France, must be issued a residence permit": (1) where an inability to receive required medical care would be of serious consequences to his or her health, and (2) effective access to the appropriate healthcare is not available in the country of origin. To make such a decision, a board of physicians is consulted. They were of the opinion that his return to Bangladesh would have "exceptionally serious consequences" on his health and noticed that the air pollution in Bangladesh is extremely high. Indeed, in reaching its conclusion that the asylum seeker could remain in France, the Court specifically "relied on information about [his] father, who had died as a result of respiratory failure brought about by an exacerbation in his asthma" in Bangladesh, as well as poor healthcare generally in Bangladesh, including the risk that frequent blackouts would pose to his use of a ventilator there.