Case Law

Case Law includes national and international jurisprudential decisions. Administrative bodies and tribunals are included.

Afghanistan 5
Albania 3
Algeria 6
Australia 68
Austria 1
Bangladesh 2
Belgium 3
Bosnia and Herzegovina 2
Brazil 3
Bulgaria 1
Canada 24
China 3
Colombia 4
Costa Rica 2
Czech Republic 4
Egypt 2
El Salvador 2
Ethiopia 2
Fiji 2
France 7
Georgia 2
Germany 1
Ghana 2
Greece 1
Guinea 1
Hungary 2
India 7
Indonesia 2
Iran, Islamic Republic of 2
Iraq 15
Ireland 1
Italy 1
Jamaica 3
Japan 1
Kenya 1
Korea, Democratic People's Republic of 1
Korea, Republic of 1
Kyrgyzstan 2
Latvia 1
Lebanon 4
Libya 1
Malawi 1
Malaysia 4
Mexico 8
Moldova, Republic of 2
Mongolia 2
Myanmar 1
Nepal 6
Netherlands 1
New Zealand 18
Nigeria 9
Pakistan 18
Palestine, State of 3
Papua New Guinea 1
Philippines 2
Poland 2
Russian Federation 6
Senegal 2
Serbia 9
Sierra Leone 1
Slovakia 1
Somalia 1
South Africa 2
Spain 1
Sri Lanka 9
Sudan 1
Thailand 1
Timor-Leste (East Timor) 1
Trinidad and Tobago 1
Turkey 4
Uganda 1
Ukraine 2
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 60
United States of America 4
Vanuatu 2
Viet Nam 2

Selected filters: Effective protection

Filter:

Showing 1-10 of 191 results

AFFAIRE A.E.A. c. GRÈCE (Requête no 39034/12) The possibility of introducing an asylum claim is a conditio sine qua non for the effective protection of persons in need of international protection. If authorities do not guarantee unhindered access to the asylum procedure, asylum-seekers can not make use of the procedural rights foreseen within the asylum procedure and are at risk of being arrested at any time. Hence even if the asylum procedure offers effective safeguards, these are of no use if, as in the present case, the asylum claim is not registered for a long period of time. [85] violation of article 13 (effective remedy) in combination with article 3 ECHR. 15 March 2018 \| Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights \| Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) \| Topic(s): Access to procedures - Effective protection - Effective remedy - Registration \| Countries: Egypt - Greece - Sudan - Turkey
NA and VA (protection: Article 7(2) Qualification Directive) India v. Secretary of State for the Home Department 29 May 2015 \| Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) \| Topic(s): EU Qualification Directive - Effective protection \| Countries: India - Pakistan - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
RRT Case no. 1406045 9 February 2015 \| Judicial Body: Australia: Refugee Review Tribunal \| Topic(s): Domestic violence - Effective protection \| Countries: Australia - Lebanon
RRT Case No. 1413568 31 October 2014 \| Judicial Body: Australia: Refugee Review Tribunal \| Topic(s): Christian - Effective protection - Forced relocation \| Countries: Australia - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
AT and Others (Article 15c; risk categories) Libya CG v. Secretary of State for the Home Department Replaced by ZMM (Article 15(c)) Libya CG [2017] UKUT 00263 (IAC) in respect of the assessment of the art 15(c) risk.- 28.06.17 14 July 2014 \| Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) \| Topic(s): Armed groups / Militias / Paramilitary forces / Resistance movements - Effective protection - Gender-based persecution - Honour killings - Internal flight alternative (IFA) / Internal relocation alternative (IRA) / Internal protection alternative (IPA) - Persecution based on political opinion - Racial / Ethnic persecution - Rejected asylum-seekers - Sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) - Women-at-risk \| Countries: Libya - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v MZYYL [2012] FCAFC 147 24 October 2012 \| Judicial Body: Australia: Federal Court \| Topic(s): Complementary forms of protection - Effective protection - State protection \| Countries: Australia
SA (Divorced woman - illegitimate child) Bangladesh v. Secretary of State for the Home Department Heard at Field House on 29th & 30th September 2010. 11 July 2011 \| Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) \| Topic(s): Children's rights - Country of origin information (COI) - Domestic violence - Effective protection - Gender-based persecution - Internal flight alternative (IFA) / Internal relocation alternative (IRA) / Internal protection alternative (IPA) - Right to family life - Sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) - Social group discrimination - Social group persecution - State protection - Women-at-risk \| Countries: Bangladesh - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
AB (Afghanistan) 30 June 2011 \| Judicial Body: New Zealand: Immigration and Protection Tribunal \| Topic(s): Effective protection - Hazara - Non-state agents of persecution - Persecution based on political opinion - Racial / Ethnic persecution - Religious persecution (including forced conversion) - Shia - State protection \| Countries: Afghanistan - New Zealand
Plaintiff M13/2011 v. Minister for Immigration and Citizenship 23 June 2011 \| Judicial Body: Australia: High Court \| Topic(s): Effective protection - Hindu - Illegitimate children - Internal flight alternative (IFA) / Internal relocation alternative (IRA) / Internal protection alternative (IPA) - Jurisdiction - Non-state agents of persecution - Religious persecution (including forced conversion) - Social group persecution - State protection \| Countries: Australia - Malaysia
AB and AC (South Africa) 21 June 2011 \| Judicial Body: New Zealand: Immigration and Protection Tribunal \| Topic(s): Effective protection - Non-state agents of persecution - Sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) - Social group persecution - State protection - Well-founded fear of persecution \| Countries: New Zealand - South Africa

Search Refworld

by keyword

and / or country

Advanced Search | Search Tips