Last Updated: Wednesday, 17 May 2023, 11:42 GMT
Refworld Home
Latest Refworld Updates for New Zealand RSS feed

New Zealand - flag New Zealand

UNHCR is not responsible for the content and availability of non-UNHCR websites. Content displays in a new window.

Filter:
Showing 1-10 of 1,034 results
Report to Deputy Chief Executive (Immigration) of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment: Restriction of Movement of Asylum Claimants

3 May 2022 | Publisher: New Zealand: Immigration Service | Document type: Research, Background and Discussion Papers

AJ (Ukraine)

This is an appeal against a decision of a refugee and protection officer declining to grant refugee status or protected person status to the appellants who are a mother (the mother) and son (the son). The mother is a citizen of the Ukraine. She is also a Russian citizen. The son was born in New Zealand. There is some dispute concerning his nationality but, as will be seen below, the Tribunal finds him to be entitled to Ukrainian citizenship.

17 February 2020 | Judicial Body: New Zealand: Immigration and Protection Tribunal | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Citizenship / Nationality law - Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures - Right to family life | Countries: New Zealand - Ukraine

Ioane Teitiota v. New Zealand (advance unedited version)

9.11 The Committee takes note of the observation of the Immigration and Protection Tribunal that climate change-induced harm can occur through sudden-onset events and slowonset processes. Reports indicate that sudden-onset events are discrete occurrences that have an immediate and obvious impact over a period of hours or days, while slow-onset effects may have a gradual, adverse impact on livelihoods and resources over a period of months to years. Both sudden-onset events (such as intense storms and flooding) and slow-onset processes (such as sea level rise, salinization, and land degradation) can propel cross-border movement of individuals seeking protection from climate change-related harm. 27 The Committee is of the view that without robust national and international efforts, the effects of climate change in receiving states may expose individuals to a violation of their rights under articles 6 or 7 of the Covenant, thereby triggering the non-refoulement obligations of sending states. Furthermore, given that the risk of an entire country becoming submerged under water is such an extreme risk, the conditions of life in such a country may become incompatible with the right to life with dignity before the risk is realized.

7 January 2020 | Judicial Body: UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Climate change (including environmental migrants) - Non-refoulement - Right to life | Countries: Kiribati - New Zealand

Options Paper 2: Options for governments on open reception and alternatives to detention (first published 2015, revised version 2020)

2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports

AC (North Korea) [2019] NZIPT 801589

The Tribunal is not satisfied that there are serious reasons for considering that the appellant “has committed a serious non-political crime outside [New Zealand] prior to his admission to [New Zealand] as a refugee” because any crime he committed was of a political kind. [125] Accordingly, the appellant is not excluded from the protection of the Refugee Convention under Article 1F(b) of that Convention.

18 November 2019 | Judicial Body: New Zealand: Immigration and Protection Tribunal | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Exclusion clauses - Serious non-political crime - Trafficking in persons | Countries: China - Korea, Democratic People's Republic of - Korea, Republic of - New Zealand

BP (Turkey)

30 October 2019 | Judicial Body: New Zealand: Immigration and Protection Tribunal | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Military service / Conscientious objection / Desertion / Draft evasion / Forced conscription | Countries: New Zealand - Türkiye

AB (Hong Kong) [2019] NZIPT 801635

11 October 2019 | Judicial Body: New Zealand: Immigration and Protection Tribunal | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Credibility assessment - Mental health - Well-founded fear of persecution | Countries: Hong Kong (Special Administrative Region of China) - New Zealand

FP (Sri Lanka)

The central issue is whether the appellant faces a real chance of being seriously mistreated by the authorities in detention, in the course of their investigation.

9 August 2019 | Judicial Body: New Zealand: Immigration and Protection Tribunal | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Police - Tamil - Well-founded fear of persecution | Countries: New Zealand - Sri Lanka

AE (Lebanon) [2019] NZIPT 801588

The primary issue to be determined by the Tribunal is whether the appellant is excluded from the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees (“Refugee Convention”) by the operation of Article 1D which applies, in certain circumstances, to persons being protected or assisted by United Nations (“UN”) organs and agencies other than the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (“UNHCR”). If so, the appellant will not be entitled to recognition as a refugee under section 129 of the Immigration Act 2009 (“the Act”).

28 May 2019 | Judicial Body: New Zealand: Immigration and Protection Tribunal | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1951 Refugee Convention | Topic(s): Exclusion clauses - Palestinian | Countries: Lebanon - New Zealand - Palestine, State of

Freedom in the World 2018 - New Zealand

1 August 2018 | Publisher: Freedom House | Document type: Annual Reports

Search Refworld

Advanced Search | Search Tips
UNHCR logo