Commission v Hungary (Accueil des demandeurs de protection internationale) C-808/18
Hungary has failed to fulfil its obligations: – in providing that applications for international protection from third-country nationals or stateless persons who, arriving from Serbia, wish to access, in its territory, the international protection procedure, may be made only in the transit zones of Röszke and Tompa, while adopting a consistent and generalised administrative practice drastically limiting the number of applicants authorised to enter those transit zones daily; – in establishing a system of systematic detention of applicants for international protection in the transit zones of Röszke and Tompa, without observing the guarantees provided for in Article 24(3) and Article 43 of Directive 2013/32 and Articles 8, 9 and 11 of Directive 2013/33; – in allowing the removal of all third-country nationals staying illegally in its territory, with the exception of those of them who are suspected of having committed a criminal offence, without observing the procedures and safeguards laid down in Article 5, Article 6(1), Article 12(1) and Article 13(1) of Directive 2008/115; – in making the exercise by applicants for international protection who fall within the scope of Article 46(5) of Directive 2013/32 of their right to remain in its territory subject to conditions contrary to EU law. 17 December 2020 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Access to procedures - Illegal entry - Immigration Detention | Countries: Hungary |
Submission by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
in the case of 2020HunGa1 and 2020HunBa119 before
the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Korea
November 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae |
Brief of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees before the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in the case O.A., et al.,
Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. DONALD J. TRUMP, AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, et al.,
Defendants-Appellants.
13 August 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae |
UNHCR Comments: Proposal for an Act on amendments to the Foreigners Act (EVA 2018-1711-0004) (Slovenia)
16 July 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Comments on National Legislation |
Esther Segai Gersagher et al. v. the Knesset et al.
The Court is requested to order the voidness of section 4 of the Prevention of Infiltration and Ensuring the Departure of Infiltrators from Israel 5775-2014 (Legislative Amendments and Temporary Provisions) 5775-2014 (hereinafter: the "Amending Law") that obliges foreign workers who entered Israel not through a border crossing (hereinafter: "Infiltrator Workers") and their employers to deposit in a special bank account a total amount at a rate of 36% of the worker's wages that will be paid to the worker only at the time of his departure from Israel (hereinafter: the "Deposit Scheme"). In short, the Petitioners argue that the Deposit Scheme, in general, or in the least some of its components, is unconstitutional and therefore should be voided. 23 April 2020 | Judicial Body: Israel: High Court of Justice | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Administrative law - Asylum-seekers - Constitutional law - Illegal entry - Non-refoulement | Countries: Eritrea - Israel - Sudan |
Esther Segai Gersagher et al v. The Knesset et al
23 April 2020 | Judicial Body: Israel: High Court of Justice | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Economic, social and cultural rights - Illegal entry - Immigration law - Right to employment | Countries: Eritrea - Israel - Sudan |
East Bay Sanctuary Covenant v. Trump
The panel affirmed the district court’s grant of a temporary restraining order and a subsequent grant of a preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of a rule and presidential proclamation that, together, strip asylum eligibility from every migrant who crosses into the United States along the southern border of Mexico between designated ports of entry. 28 February 2020 | Judicial Body: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Entry / Exit - Illegal entry - Non-refoulement - Rejection at border - Right to seek asylum | Countries: United States of America |
UNHCR Comments on Draft Amendments to the Law of the Republic of Armenia on Refugees and Asylum and the Criminal Code of the Republic of Armenia Concerning the Non-Penalization Principle
12 November 2019 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Comments on National Legislation |
Guidance on Responding to Irregular Onward Movement of Refugees and Asylum-Seekers
September 2019 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Policy/Position Papers |
O.A. v. Trump, Civ. No. 18-2718 and S.M.S.R. v. Trump, Civ. No. 18-2838 (consolidated cases)
2 August 2019 | Judicial Body: United States District Courts | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Access to procedures - Asylum policy - Asylum-seekers - Illegal entry - Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures - Right to seek asylum | Countries: El Salvador - Guatemala - Honduras - Mexico - Nicaragua - United States of America |