Last Updated: Thursday, 04 November 2021, 06:38 GMT
Latest Refworld Updates for Greece RSS feed

Greece - flag Greece

Filter:
Showing 1-10 of 1,433 results
Decisions 202005934/1 and 202006295/1

28 July 2021 | Judicial Body: Netherlands, The: Council of State (Raad van State) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Livelihoods - Return conditions | Countries: Greece - Netherlands - Syrian Arab Republic

Decision 202006295/1/V3 and decision 202005934/1/V3

28 July 2021 | Judicial Body: Netherlands, The: Council of State (Raad van State) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Livelihoods - Return conditions | Countries: Greece - Netherlands - Syrian Arab Republic

AFFAIRE E.K. c. GRÈCE

Although the applicant, who had entered Greece illegally, had benefited from satisfactory conditions of detention, the review of the lawfulness of his detention had been inadequate

15 January 2021 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment | Countries: Greece - Turkey

Supreme Administrative Court decision of 13 November 2020 - KHO:2020:4219

Given the individual assurances received by the Finnish Immigration Service from the Greek authorities that the appellant will be accommodated in a reception center that meets the require-ments of the Reception Conditions Directive and will be informed of the asylum procedure, there are no grounds for considering that the transfer to Greece is contrary to, nor have there been any reasons why, the appellant's application should be dealt with in Finland under the discretionary clause in Article 17 of the Dublin Regulation.

13 November 2020 | Judicial Body: Finland: Supreme Administrative Court | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Countries: Afghanistan - Finland - Greece

Submission by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in the case of N.E. and Others v. Greece (Appl. no. 8716/20) before the European Court of Human Rights

11 November 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae

UNHCR Comments on the Draft Law "Improvement of Migration Legislation, amendment of provisions of Laws 4636/2019 (A' 169), 4375/2016 (A' 51), 4251/2014 (A' 80) and other Provisions"

12 June 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Comments on National Legislation

Commission v Poland (Mécanisme temporaire de relocalisation de demandeurs de protection internationale) (C‑715/17, C‑718/17 and C‑719/17)

Commission sought a declaration from the Court that, by failing to indicate at regular intervals, and at least every three months, an appropriate number of applicants for international protection who could be relocated swiftly to its territory, the republic of Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic failed to fulfil its obligations

2 April 2020 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Admission quotas - Burden-sharing and international co-operation - Resettlement | Countries: Czech Republic - Greece - Hungary - Italy - Poland

UNHCR Comments on the Law on "International Protection and other Provisions" (Greece)

February 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Comments on National Legislation

USING CRIMINAL LAW TO RESTRICT THE WORK OF NGOS SUPPORTING REFUGEES AND OTHER MIGRANTS IN COUNCIL OF EUROPE MEMBER STATES

December 2019 | Publisher: Council of Europe | Document type: Thematic Reports

CASE OF ILIAS AND AHMED v. HUNGARY (Application no. 47287/15) (Grand Chamber)

The Court found in particular that the Hungarian authorities had failed in their duty under Article 3 to assess the risks of the applicants not having proper access to asylum proceedings in Serbia or being subjected to chain-refoulement, which could have seen them being sent to Greece, where conditions in refugee camps had already been found to be in violation of Article 3. In a development of its case-law, it held that Article 5 was not applicable to the applicants’ case as there had been no de facto deprivation of liberty in the transit zone. Among other things, the Court found that the applicants had entered the transit zone of their own initiative and it had been possible in practice for them to return to Serbia, where they had not faced any danger to their life or health. Their fears of a lack of access to Serbia’s asylum system or of refoulement to Greece, as expressed under Article 3, had not been enough to make their stay in the transit zone involuntary.

21 November 2019 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Expulsion - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Rejection at border - Right to liberty and security - Safe third country - Transit | Countries: Bangladesh - Greece - Hungary - North Macedonia - Serbia - Turkey

Search Refworld