Case Law

Is it reasonable for the RPD to rely upon evidence of the refugee’s lack of subjective [let alone any] knowledge that use of a passport confers diplomatic protection to rebut the presumption that a refugee who acquires and travels on a passport issued by their country of origin has intended to avail themselves of that state’s protection? Yes. Is it reasonable for the RPD to rely upon evidence that a refugee took measures to protect themselves against their agent of persecution [or that of their family member who is the principal refugee applicant] to rebut the presumption that a refugee who acquires [or renews] a passport issued by their country of origin and uses it to return to their country of origin has intended to avail themselves of that state’s protection? Yes.

29 March 2022 | Judicial Body: Canada: Federal Court of Appeal | Topic(s): Cessation clauses - Diplomatic protection - Passports | Countries: Canada - Colombia

Question about granting second asylum to a Chinese national of Tibetan ethnicity born in India. Second asylum, within the meaning of Art. 50 LAsi, does not presuppose recognition as a refugee in a first state of asylum that is a signatory to the Refugee Convention.

4 July 2019 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Topic(s): Family reunification - Freedom of movement - Passports - Refugee / Asylum law - Visas | Countries: China - Switzerland

Due to the authorities mishandling of procedures related to the granting of citizenship, the applicants had found themselves not only in a situation comparable to that in the Smirnova case, but also faced consequences affecting their social identity far more fundamentally as they had been deprived of any legal status in Russia. They had become stateless persons and remained so until 2010 and 2013 respectively. It had taken the authorities from 2007 until 2013 for the general problem to be solved. Since the authorities’ oversight had resulted in consequences for the applicants so severely affecting their private life, it amounted to an arbitrary interference. The authorities had thus failed to act diligently.

12 June 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Passports - Statelessness | Countries: Russian Federation

6 April 2017 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Topic(s): Passports - Rejected asylum-seekers - Statelessness - Travel documents | Countries: Nigeria - Russian Federation - Sierra Leone - Switzerland

6 April 2017 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Topic(s): Passports - Rejected asylum-seekers - Statelessness - Travel documents | Countries: Nigeria - Russian Federation - Sierra Leone - Switzerland

Unofficial English translation below. Official Spanish decision attached.

24 June 2015 | Judicial Body: Ecuador: Corte Constitucional | Topic(s): Asylum-seekers - Expulsion - Illegal entry - Non-refoulement - Passports - Refoulement - Refugee / Asylum law - Refugees - Visas

5 April 2013 | Judicial Body: Finland: Supreme Court | Topic(s): 1951 Refugee Convention - Asylum-seekers - Criminal justice - Entry / Exit - False documents - Passports - Smuggling of persons - Travel documents | Countries: Afghanistan - Finland

Cet arrêt est devenu définitif en vertu de l’article 44 § 2 de la Convention. Il peut subir des retouches de forme.

20 December 2011 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Countries: Belgium - Cameroon