Case Law

Application for leave to appeal against a decision of an Immigration Judge of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal under Section 103B of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.

17 June 2009 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Court of Session (Scotland) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Credibility assessment - Deportation / Forcible return - Persecution of family members - Well-founded fear of persecution | Countries: Iran, Islamic Republic of - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Application for judicial review.

28 May 2009 | Judicial Body: Australia: Federal Magistrates Court | Topic(s): Country of origin information (COI) - One-child policy / Family planning - Right to employment - Social group discrimination - Social group persecution - Well-founded fear of persecution | Countries: Australia - China

Application for judicial review.

30 March 2009 | Judicial Body: Canada: Federal Court | Topic(s): Sexual and reproductive rights - Well-founded fear of persecution - Women's rights - Women-at-risk | Countries: Canada - China

Application for judicial review.

30 March 2009 | Judicial Body: Canada: Federal Court | Topic(s): Sexual and reproductive rights - Well-founded fear of persecution - Women's rights - Women-at-risk | Countries: Canada - China

The case summary in English has been prepared in the framework of the Knowledge-Based Harmonisation of European Asylum Practices Project (2010-2012), co-financed by the European Refugee Fund.

17 March 2009 | Judicial Body: Austria: Supreme Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgerichtshof) | Topic(s): Chechen - Complementary forms of protection - Internal flight alternative (IFA) / Internal relocation alternative (IRA) / Internal protection alternative (IPA) - Mental health - Well-founded fear of persecution | Countries: Austria - Russian Federation

Application for judicial review.

12 March 2009 | Judicial Body: Ireland: High Court | Topic(s): Discrimination based on race, nationality, ethnicity - Palestinian - Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures - Statelessness - Statelessness - Well-founded fear of persecution | Countries: Ireland - Libya

Application for judicial review.

4 March 2009 | Judicial Body: Canada: Federal Court | Topic(s): Unlawful departure - Well-founded fear of persecution | Countries: Canada - Cuba

Application for judicial review.

4 March 2009 | Judicial Body: Canada: Federal Court | Topic(s): Unlawful departure - Well-founded fear of persecution | Countries: Canada - Cuba

22 September 2008 | Judicial Body: United States Attorney-General | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return - Female genital mutilation (FGM) - Social group persecution - Well-founded fear of persecution | Countries: Mali - United States of America

The Refugee Status Appeals Authority reaffirmed in this decision New Zealand jurisprudence on the internal protection alternative, holding that even were it free to do so, it would not follow the decisions of the House of Lords in Januzi v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2006] 2 AC 426 and AH (Sudan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2007] 3 WLR 832 which facilitate the withholding of recognition of refugee status. The Authority emphasized that such withholding of recognition can only occur in a highly limited class of case where (a) the proposed internal protection alternative is accessible to the individual. This requires that the access be practical, safe and legal; (b) in the proposed site of internal protection there is no risk of being persecuted for a Convention reason; (c) in the proposed site of internal protection there are no new risks of being persecuted or of being exposed to other forms of serious harm or of refoulement; and finally, (d) in the proposed site of internal protection basic norms of civil, political and socio-economic rights will be provided by the State. The Authority has also declined to follow the two recent decisions of the High Court of Australia in SZATV v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship (2007) 237 ALR 634 and SZFDV v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship (2007) 237 ALR 660. In these two decisions the "protection" element of the refugee definition in Article 1A(2) was interpreted as "diplomatic protection".

In this decision, addressing honour killings in Turkey, the Authority also held that the political opinion ground was the most appropriate Convention ground on which the claim succeeded. The Authority has made important observations about gender in the context of the political opinion ground and the need for that ground to receive a gender-sensitive interpretation. It concluded that "honour" enforces rigid control by men over women and their sexuality. It is about policing community norms and codes of behaviour, collective decisions and acts of punishment. Ultimately, it is about the distribution and exercise of power in Turkish society. The observance of honour reflects the gendered inequality of power in that society. In the specific context the Authority was satisfied that the claimant's assertion of her right to life and of her right to control her life and her challenge to inequality and the structures of power which support it, was plainly "political" as that term is used in the Refugee Convention.

11 September 2008 | Judicial Body: New Zealand: Refugee Status Appeals Authority | Topic(s): Blood feuds - Country of origin information (COI) - Internal flight alternative (IFA) / Internal relocation alternative (IRA) / Internal protection alternative (IPA) - Kurd - Persecution based on political opinion - Social group persecution - State protection - Well-founded fear of persecution | Countries: New Zealand - Türkiye