UNHCR is not responsible for the content and availability of non-UNHCR websites. Content displays in a new window.
Urteil (des Bundesgerichts) 2C_587/2021 vom 16. Februar 2022
16 February 2022 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Federal Court | Topic(s): Exclusion clauses - Palestinian - Statelessness - Statelessness Determination Procedures - UNRWA | Countries: Switzerland - Syrian Arab Republic |
Arrest nr 260 333
7 September 2021 | Judicial Body: Belgium: Conseil du Contentieux des Etrangers | Topic(s): Exclusion clauses - Forced marriage - Military service / Conscientious objection / Desertion / Draft evasion / Forced conscription - Serious non-political crime | Countries: Belgium - Syrian Arab Republic |
Urteil (des Bundesgerichts) 2C_330/2020 vom 6. August 2021
6 August 2021 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Federal Court | Topic(s): Exclusion clauses - Palestinian - Statelessness - Statelessness Determination Procedures - UNRWA | Countries: Switzerland - Syrian Arab Republic |
Bundesrepublik Deutschland v XT, Case C‑507/19, Request for a preliminary ruling
1. The second sentence of Article 12(1)(a) of Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, and for the content of the protection granted must be interpreted as meaning that, in order to determine whether the protection or assistance from the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) has ceased, it is necessary to take into account, as part of an individual assessment of all the relevant factors of the situation in question, all the fields of UNRWA’s area of operations which a stateless person of Palestinian origin who has left that area has a concrete possibility of accessing and safely remaining therein. 2. The second sentence of Article 12(1)(a) of Directive 2011/95 must be interpreted as meaning that UNRWA’s protection or assistance cannot be regarded as having ceased where a stateless person of Palestinian origin left the UNRWA area of operations from a field in that area in which his or her personal safety was at serious risk and in which UNRWA was not in a position to provide that individual with protection or assistance, first, if that individual voluntarily travelled to that field from another field in that area in which his or her personal safety was not at serious risk and in which he or she could receive protection or assistance from UNRWA and, secondly, if he or she could not reasonably expect, on the basis of the specific information available to him or her, to receive protection or assistance from UNRWA in the field to which he or she travelled or to be able to return at short notice to the field from which he or she came, which is for the national court to verify. 13 January 2021 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Legal Instrument: 2011 Recast Qualification Directive (EU) | Topic(s): Exclusion clauses - Palestinian - Statelessness | Countries: Germany - Lebanon - Syrian Arab Republic |
Supreme Administrative Court decision of 2 November 2018 - KHO:2018:147
2 November 2018 | Judicial Body: Finland: Supreme Administrative Court | Topic(s): Armed forces / Military - Burden of proof - Exclusion clauses | Countries: Finland - Syrian Arab Republic |
Décision N° 410897
Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the UN are those that are likely to affect international peace and security, peaceful relations between states as well as serious violations of human rights. exclusion under 1F(c) depends on the existence of serious reasons to consider that part of the responsibility in the actions can be personally imputed to the applicant. The court has to assess whether the facts resulting from the investigation are such as to give rise to serious grounds for believing that the applicant was personally involved in such actions. 11 April 2018 | Judicial Body: France: Conseil d'Etat | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations - Exclusion clauses | Countries: France - Syrian Arab Republic |
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 |
A. und seine Kinder B. und C. v Staatssekretariat für Migration (SEM)
5 January 2017 | Judicial Body: Switzerland: Tribunal administratif fédéral | Topic(s): Exclusion clauses - Kurd - Refugee / Asylum law - Statelessness | Countries: Switzerland - Syrian Arab Republic |
Applicant v. State Secretary for Security and Justice
17 May 2016 | Judicial Body: Netherlands, The: Council of State (Raad van State) | Topic(s): 1951 Refugee Convention - Armed forces / Military - Denial of refugee status - Exclusion clauses - International courts and tribunals | Countries: Netherlands - Syrian Arab Republic |
MH (Syria) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department; DS (Afghanistan) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department
On appeal from the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (AA/06912/2006 and AA/07062/2007). 24 March 2009 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Court of Appeal (England and Wales) | Topic(s): Acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations - Anti-terrorism law - Crimes against humanity - Crimes against peace - Criminal justice - Exclusion clauses - International humanitarian law (IHL) / Geneva Conventions - Kurd - Persecution based on political opinion - Tajik - Terrorism | Countries: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland |