UNHCR is not responsible for the content and availability of non-UNHCR websites. Content displays in a new window.
EASO Age assessment practices in EU+ countries:
updated findings
July 2021 | Publisher: European Union: European Asylum Support Office (EASO) | Document type: Thematic Reports |
The Office of United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees ('UNHCR')
Statement on family reunification for beneficiaries of international protection Issued in the context of the preliminary ruling reference to the Court of Justice of the European Union in
the case of CR, GF, TY v. Landeshauptmann von Wien (C-560/20)
22 June 2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae |
Der Kindeswohlvorrang im Asylverfahrenskontext - Rechtliche Grundlagen und Empfehlungen für die Umsetzung in Österreich
June 2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Research, Background and Discussion Papers |
Opinion of Advocate General Saugmandsgaard Øe in Case C‑18/20
(1) The concept of ‘new elements or findings [that] have arisen or have been presented by the applicant’, as used in Article 40(2) and (3) of Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection, must be interpreted as meaning that it also covers elements or findings which already existed before the procedure relating to a previous application for international protection was definitively concluded, but which were not relied on by the applicant in the context of that procedure. (2) Article 40(3) of Directive 2013/32 must be interpreted as meaning that the substantive examination of a subsequent application does not require a specific procedure, provided that the national procedure fulfils the requirements laid down in Chapter II of that directive. Article 42(2) of that directive, read in conjunction with Article 40(2) to (4) and Article 33(2)(d) thereof, must be interpreted as prohibiting the setting of time limits per se. (3) Article 40(4) of Directive 2013/32 must be interpreted as meaning that the condition relating to the absence of fault laid down therein cannot be applied in the context of an administrative procedure unless that condition is expressly laid down in national law in a manner that satisfies the requirements of legal certainty. It is for the referring court to verify whether this is the case here. 15 April 2021 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures | Countries: Austria - Iraq |
Austria: Federal Act Concerning the Granting of Asylum (2005 Asylum Act - Asylgesetz 2005)
23 December 2020 | Publisher: National Legislative Bodies / National Authorities | Document type: National Legislation |
Austria: Federal Act Laying Down General Stipulations Concerning Procedures Before the Federal Office for Immigration and Asylum in Relation to the Granting of International Protection, Residence Permits on Grounds Deserving of Consideration and Temporary Leave to Remain, the Imposition of Deportation Orders and Measures to Terminate Residence and the Issuance of Austrian Documents to Aliens (Federal Office Procedure Act; BFA-Verfahrensgesetz)
23 December 2020 | Publisher: National Legislative Bodies / National Authorities | Document type: National Legislation |
Campaign Update, July 2020 - September 2020
14 October 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country News |
UNHCR-Analyse des Entwurfs eines Gesetzes, mit dem das Gesetz über die Gewährung von Sozialunterstützung (Steiermärkisches Sozialunterstützungsgesetz) erlassen und das Steiermärkische Sozialhilfegesetz, das Steiermärkische Wohnunterstützungsgesetz, das Steiermärkische Behindertengesetz und das Steiermärkische Grundversorgungsgesetz geändert werden
18 August 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Comments on National Legislation |
Austria: UNHCR Submission for the Universal Periodic Review - Austria - UPR 37th Session (2021)
July 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country Reports |
E 4682/2019-10
The contested finding therefore lacks a conclusive reason why there is no persecution relevant to asylum, in the absence of a discussion of the dangers that threaten the complainant due to the attempted forced recruitment, which has been found to be credible. Likewise, in connection with the examination of the requirements for the granting of the status of subsidiary protection, there is no comprehensible reason for the statement that the complainant is not at risk from the Taliban in Mazar-e Sharif and that a return there is safe and reasonable while the UNHCR guidelines basically assume that there is no internal flight alternative in Afghanistan for people who are persecuted by the Taliban 20 February 2020 | Judicial Body: Austria: Constitutional Court of Austria (Verfassungsgerichtshof) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Internal flight alternative (IFA) / Internal relocation alternative (IRA) / Internal protection alternative (IPA) - Military service / Conscientious objection / Desertion / Draft evasion / Forced conscription - Non-state agents of persecution | Countries: Afghanistan - Austria |