Case Law
- Austria: Constitutional Court of Austria (Verfassungsgerichtshof) 1
- Austria: Supreme Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgerichtshof) 1
- Bangladesh: Supreme Court 1
- Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights 1
- European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union 2
- Finland: Supreme Administrative Court 2
- France: Conseil d'Etat 3
- France: Cour administrative 1
- France: Cour nationale du droit d'asile 1
- Germany: Bundesverfassungsgericht 1
- Germany: Verwaltungsgericht 1
- Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACrtHR) 1
- New Zealand: Immigration and Protection Tribunal 2
- Norway: Supreme Court 1
- Sweden: Migration Court of Appeal (Migrationsöverdomstolen) 1
- Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral 1
- United Kingdom: Asylum and Immigration Tribunal / Immigration Appellate Authority 1
- United Kingdom: Court of Appeal (England and Wales) 4
- United Kingdom: House of Lords (Judicial Committee) 1
- United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) 6
- Afghanistan 6
- Albania 1
- Algeria 1
- Austria 2
- Bangladesh 1
- Belgium 2
- Congo, Democratic Republic of the 2
- Ecuador 1
- Egypt 1
- Eritrea 2
- Finland 3
- France 5
- Georgia 1
- Germany 2
- Greece 2
- Iran, Islamic Republic of 2
- Iraq 2
- Jordan 1
- Lebanon 1
- Morocco 1
- Myanmar 2
- New Zealand 2
- Norway 1
- Palestine, State of 2
- Slovakia 1
- Slovenia 1
- Sweden 1
- Switzerland 1
- Syrian Arab Republic 2
- Türkiye 1
- Tuvalu 1
- United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland 12
- Zimbabwe 1
- 1951 Refugee Convention 1
- Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations 4
- Acts of persecution 1
- Agents of persecution 2
- Arbitrary arrest and detention 1
- Burden of proof 2
- Cessation clauses 2
- Changes of circumstances in home country 2
- Children-at-risk 2
- Climate change (including environmental migrants) 1
- Complementary forms of protection 3
- Country of origin information (COI) 1
- Credibility assessment 1
- Crimes against humanity 2
- Denial of refugee status 1
- Deportation / Forcible return 5
- Economic, social and cultural rights 1
- Effective protection 1
- Entry / Exit 1
- Equality before the law 1
- Evidence (including age and language assessments / medico-legal reports) 2
- Exclusion clauses 10
- False documents 1
- Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment 2
- Generalized violence 4
- Illegal entry 1
- Internal armed conflict 1
- Internal flight alternative (IFA) / Internal relocation alternative (IRA) / Internal protection alternative (IPA) 1
- International criminal law 1
- Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) 1
- Mentally disadvantaged persons 1
- Military service / Conscientious objection / Desertion / Draft evasion / Forced conscription 1
- National security / Public order 3
- Non-refoulement 2
- Non-state agents of persecution 1
- Palestinian 2
- Persecution based on political opinion 1
- Persecution on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity 1
- Re-entry 1
- Reception 5
- Refoulement 2
- Refugee / Asylum law 5
- Refugee camps 1
- Refugee identity documents 3
- Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures 3
- Right to health 1
- Right to liberty and security 1
- Right to seek asylum 1
- Roma 1
- Security situation 1
- Serious non-political crime 2
- State protection 1
- Terrorism 2
- Torture 1
- Travel documents 3
|
Ra 2017/19/0531
the term "particularly serious crime" concerns only criminal offenses that objectively violate particularly important legal interests. Typically, serious crimes include homicides, rape, child abuse, arson, drug trafficking, armed robbery, and the like. 5 April 2018 | Judicial Body: Austria: Supreme Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgerichtshof) | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): Exclusion clauses - Serious non-political crime | Countries: Austria - Syrian Arab Republic |
|
case nos. 17LY02181 – 17LY02184
situation in region and Kabul is likely to be qualified as situation of indiscriminate violence resulting from an internal armed conflict in light of subsidiary protection. In these conditions, the prefect had erred in applying the law by deciding that, instead of authorising to register the application in France, the applicant be transferred to Finland where this country had already rejected the asylum application, expelled and issue an entry ban against the applicant. 13 March 2018 | Judicial Body: France: Cour administrative | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): Generalized violence - Internal armed conflict - Refoulement | Countries: Afghanistan - Finland - France |
|
Décision N° 17045561, 9 March 2018
Afghanistan: In Kabul, a high-intensity situation of indiscriminate violence resulting from an internal armed conflict allows granting a civilian the benefit of subsidiary protection under Article L. 712-1 (c) of the CESEDA. 9 March 2018 | Judicial Body: France: Cour nationale du droit d'asile | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): Complementary forms of protection - Generalized violence | Countries: Afghanistan - France |
|
VfGH 07.03.2018, G 136/2017 ua
recognized refugees are entitled to the same amount of social welfare as Austrian citizens in line with Art. 23 of the 1951 Convention 7 March 2018 | Judicial Body: Austria: Constitutional Court of Austria (Verfassungsgerichtshof) | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): Economic, social and cultural rights - Equality before the law | Countries: Austria |
|
THE QUEEN ON THE APPLICATION OF AB (Appellant) - and - THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT (Respondent)
The question of wider importance raised on this appeal is whether rule 334(i) of the Immigration Rules requires an applicant for asylum in the United Kingdom to be present in the country at the time of the decision on the application. 6 March 2018 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Court of Appeal (England and Wales) | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): Entry / Exit - Re-entry | Countries: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland |
|
N° 404756, ECLI:FR:CECHR:2017:404756.20171228
assessment of all cessation clauses by the court 7 February 2018 | Judicial Body: France: Conseil d'Etat | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): Cessation clauses | Countries: Congo, Democratic Republic of the - France |
|
Urteil vom 30. Januar 2018
https://www.bvger.ch/bvger/de/home/rechtsprechung/entscheiddatenbank-bvger.html 30 January 2018 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): Agents of persecution - Security situation | Countries: Afghanistan - Switzerland |
|
OO (Burma -TS remains appropriate CG) Burma [2018] UKUT 00052 (IAC)
1. Whether there has been a change of conditions in Burma to justify a departure from the country guidance in TS. 2. Second, whether this appellant is reasonably likely to be at prospective risk in Burma, given his particular political profile and likely political activities in Burma, in light of TS and / or the updated country conditions. 3. Third, and in the alternative, whether the appellant would be unable to renew his passport or obtain a certificate of identity (‘CoI’) from the Burmese Embassy, with the result that he would be detained on return to Burma. 9 January 2018 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Changes of circumstances in home country - Evidence (including age and language assessments / medico-legal reports) | Countries: Myanmar - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland |
|
Immigration Appeals Board v. A, B, and C, HR-2017-2078-A, (case no. 2017/670)
whether it is in accordance with the UN Refugee Convention article 28 to refuse to issue travel documents to refugees with lawful residence in Norway, because there is doubt regarding their identities 31 October 2017 | Judicial Body: Norway: Supreme Court | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): National security / Public order - Refugee identity documents - Travel documents | Countries: Eritrea - Iraq - Norway |
|
Flüchtlingsanerkennung für palästinensische Personen aus Syrien und wegen Wehrdienstentziehung
28 June 2017 | Judicial Body: Germany: Verwaltungsgericht | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Military service / Conscientious objection / Desertion / Draft evasion / Forced conscription - Palestinian - Persecution based on political opinion - Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures - Torture | Countries: Germany - Palestine, State of |
