Last Updated: Thursday, 24 October 2019, 17:23 GMT

Case Law

Case Law includes national and international jurisprudential decisions. Administrative bodies and tribunals are included.
Filter:
Showing 51-60 of 12,388 results
A.H c. Suisse

6 December 2018 | Judicial Body: UN Committee Against Torture (CAT) | Legal Instrument: 1984 Convention against Torture (CAT) | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment | Countries: Ethiopia - Italy - Switzerland

CASE OF KHANH v. CYPRUS (Application no. 43639/12)

4 December 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Prison or detention conditions | Countries: Cyprus - Viet Nam

Minister of Home Affairs v Ali (1289/17) 2018 ZASCA 169

Citizenship Amendment Act 17 of 2010 - interpretation of s4(3) of the Act - section does not have a retrospective effect - respondents satisfy the requirements of citizenship by naturalisation - failure of the Minister to promulgate regulations for applications for citizenship in terms of s 23 of the Act - the order of the high court directing the Minister to accept applications on affidavits does not encroach upon the doctrine of separation of powers

30 November 2018 | Judicial Body: South Africa: Supreme Court of Appeal | Topic(s): Citizenship / Nationality law - Naturalization - Statelessness | Countries: South Africa

Conclusion de l'Avocat general Wahl dans l'affaire C-635/17 E. contre Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie

Propose a la cour par le A.G. : L’article 11, paragraphe 2, de la directive 2003/86/CE du Conseil, du 22 septembre 2003, relative au droit au regroupement familial, doit être interprété en ce sens qu’il ne s’oppose pas à une législation nationale en vertu de laquelle le bénéficiaire d’une protection internationale est tenu, aux fins de l’examen de sa demande de regroupement familial, d’expliquer d’une manière plausible les raisons pour lesquelles il se trouve dans l’incapacité de fournir des pièces justificatives officielles attestant de l’existence d’un lien familial, pour autant que l’autorité nationale compétente apprécie ces explications au regard non seulement des informations pertinentes, tant générales que particulières, concernant la situation dans le pays d’origine de ce dernier, mais également de la situation particulière dans laquelle celui-ci se trouve.

29 November 2018 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Topic(s): Children's rights - Family reunification - Refugee identity documents - Right to family life | Countries: Eritrea - Netherlands

Ahmad Shah Ayubi v Bezirkshauptmannschaft Linz-Land (C‑713/17) (request for preliminary ruling)

1. Article 29 of Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted, must be interpreted as meaning that it precludes national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, which provides that refugees with a temporary right of residence in a Member State are to be granted social security benefits which are less than those received by nationals of that Member State and refugees who have a permanent right of residence in that Member State. 2. A refugee may rely on the incompatibility of legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, with Article 29(1) of Directive 2011/95 before the national courts in order to remove the restriction on his rights provided for by that legislation.

21 November 2018 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Topic(s): Economic, social and cultural rights - Refugee / Asylum law | Countries: Austria

Decision 201701423/1/V2

21 November 2018 | Judicial Body: Netherlands, The: Council of State (Raad van State) | Topic(s): Gender-based persecution - Persecution based on political opinion - Religious persecution (including forced conversion) - Sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) - Women's rights - Women-at-risk | Countries: Afghanistan - Netherlands

Applicant v. State Secretary for Security and Justice

12 November 2018 | Judicial Body: Netherlands, The: The Hague District Court | Topic(s): Internal flight alternative (IFA) / Internal relocation alternative (IRA) / Internal protection alternative (IPA) - Internally displaced persons (IDPs) - Safe country of origin | Countries: Netherlands - Ukraine

K, B v Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie (C-380/17) (request for preliminary ruling)

1. The Court of Justice has jurisdiction, on the basis of Article 267 TFEU, to interpret Article 12(1) of Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification in a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings, where a national court is called upon to rule on a beneficiary of subsidiary protection’s right to family reunification, if that provision was made directly and unconditionally applicable to such a situation under national law. 2. Article 12(1) of Directive 2003/86 does not preclude national legislation which permits an application for family reunification lodged on behalf of a member of a refugee’s family, on the basis of the more favourable provisions for refugees of Chapter V of that directive, to be rejected on the ground that that application was lodged more than three months after the sponsor was granted refugee status, whilst affording the possibility of lodging a fresh application under a different set of rules provided that that legislation: – lays down that such a ground of refusal cannot apply to situations in which particular circumstances render the late submission of the initial application objectively excusable; – lays down that the persons concerned are to be fully informed of the consequences of the decision rejecting their initial application and of the measures which they can take to assert their rights to family reunification effectively; and – ensures that sponsors recognised as refugees continue to benefit from the more favourable conditions for the exercise of the right to family reunification applicable to refugees, specified in Articles 10 and 11 or in Article 12(2) of the directive.

7 November 2018 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Topic(s): Family reunification | Countries: Netherlands

AFFAIRE K.G. c. BELGIQUE (Requête no 52548/15)

Non-violation de l'article 5 - Droit à la liberté et à la sûreté (Article 5-1 - Arrestation ou détention régulières)

6 November 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Right to liberty and security | Countries: Belgium - Sri Lanka

Supreme Administrative Court decision of 2 November 2018 - KHO:2018:147

2 November 2018 | Judicial Body: Finland: Supreme Administrative Court | Topic(s): Armed forces / Military - Burden of proof - Exclusion clauses | Countries: Finland - Syrian Arab Republic

Search Refworld