During the last several decades, many people, fleeing from disasters or political threats, have applied for asylum in the European countries. Council Directive 2003/9/EC, laying down minimum standards for the reception of asylum-seekers, as well as several other directives, have been developed in the EU in order to ensure fair treatment of the asylum-seekers in all the European countries. However, there are huge differences in the national asylum laws of countries and consequently, the way they treat the asylum-seekers. In this research, the national asylum laws of Germany and the Netherlands are studied and compared, showing that though following the Council Directive, fair or equal treatment of asylum-seekers cannot be guaranteed. In the Netherlands asylum-seekers are granted with a great extent of benefits while in Germany, they are greatly discriminated against. Based on the Social Determinants of Health Model, developed by Dahlgren and Whitehead in 1991, the hypothesis is that the asylum seekers in the Netherlands enjoy better health status than the ones in Germany, because based on the Dutch asylum laws, they have better living and working conditions. In order to confirm or negate this hypothesis, a meta-study of available literature on the health status of asylum-seekers has been done. However, the hypothesis could not be confirmed/ negated due to extreme lack of availability of data in this area. By discussing the relationship between life conditions and health of individuals, reviewing current legal instruments regulating asylum in the EU and analyzing the available data on the health status of asylum-seekers, this paper draws the attention to the importance of data and research on these topics and the need for development of practices for collection of such information. Availability of such information can affect future decision and policy makings regarding asylum-seekers and their health and might result in comprehensive reformations in the current national or international legal instruments.