Last Updated: Wednesday, 17 May 2023, 15:20 GMT
Refworld Home

Administration of justice / Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness

Filter:
Showing 21-30 of 5,507 results
The Supreme Court Resolution of 25 March 2020

In January 2015, the applicant’s house was destroyed by ordnances. A commission examined the level of destruction and recognized it as inevitable. The applicant referred to the court claiming a compensation according to the Civil Protection Code, the Law on combatting terrorism and the Protocol 1 to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The requested amount of compensation was 1 156 356,50 UAH. The applicant’s claim was rejected in the lower instance courts. The applicant appealed the decisions of the lower-instance courts and reached the Supreme Court. The latter decided that the applicant is entitled to compensation due to the state’s failure to elaborate the relevant compensation mechanism as a protection measure of the property right. Ukraine is now obliged to compensate for the damaged housing under Protocol 1 to the ECHR. There is no clear mechanism on the payment of compensations though. Therefore, the Court assigned 100,000 UAH of compensation from the State Budget of Ukraine, which is much lower than an applicant requested. However, the decision is final and cannot be disputed in Ukraine.

25 March 2020 | Judicial Body: Ukraine: Supreme Court | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness - Ukrainians | Countries: Ukraine

Submission by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in the case of M.J. v. the Netherlands (application no. 49259/18) before the European Court of Human Rights

6 December 2019 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae

Brief of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees before the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the case East Bay Sanctuary Covenant, et al., v. William P. Barr ("East Bay Sanctuary (II)")

15 October 2019 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae

BALDEMAR ZUNIGA, Petitioner, v. WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General,Respondent.

This case presents us with a simple question: do non-citizens subject to expedited removal under 8 U.S.C. § 1228 have a statutory right to counsel in reasonable fear proceedings before immigration judges? The answer, based on the plain language of § 1228, is yes.

20 August 2019 | Judicial Body: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Legal representation / Legal aid - Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness - Well-founded fear of persecution | Countries: Mexico - United States of America

PN v. SSHD [2019] EWHC 1616 (Admin)

The determination of the First-tier Tribunal to dismiss the claimant’s appeal against the refusal of her asylum claim was reached by a process which was procedurally unfair as it did not give her sufficient opportunity to obtain evidence from Uganda to support her claim. The determination will be quashed and the defendant will be ordered to use his best endeavours to facilitate the return of the claimant to the United Kingdom to enable her to continue with her appeal. The claimant was lawfully detained from 21 July 2013 to 6 August 2013 and from 10 September 2013 until her removal to Uganda on 12 December 2013. The claimant was unlawfully detained from (and including) 6 August 2013 up to 10 September 2013.

24 June 2019 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: High Court (England and Wales) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Evidence (including age and language assessments / medico-legal reports) - Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) - Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness | Countries: Uganda - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Brief of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees as Amicus Curiae in Support of Plaintiffs & Affirmance in East Bay Sanctuary Covenant et al v. Donald J. Trump

8 May 2019 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae

Brief of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in the case S.M.S.R., et al., v. Donald J. Trump

10 December 2018 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae

East Bay Sanctuary Covenant et al v. Donald J. Trump et al

7 December 2018 | Judicial Body: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Asylum policy - Illegal entry - Non-refoulement - Right to seek asylum - Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness | Countries: United States of America

Brief of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees before the United States District Court for the District of Columbia in O.A., et al., v. Donald J. Trump

6 December 2018 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae

Brief of Amicus Curiae United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in East Bay Sanctuary Covenant et al v. Donald J. Trump

5 December 2018 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae

Search Refworld

Advanced Search | Search Tips
UNHCR logo