Last Updated: Tuesday, 23 May 2023, 12:44 GMT

Adjudication of asylum claims (refugee status determination / asylum procedures)

Filter:
Showing 81-90 of 33,213 results
UNHCR Submission for the Universal Periodic Review – Suriname – UPR 39th Session (2021)

February 2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country Reports

Secretary of State for the Home Department v. OA

On those grounds, the Court (Second Chamber) hereby rules: (1) Article 11(1)(e) of Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted, must be interpreted as meaning that the requirements to be met by the ‘protection’ to which that provision refers in respect of the cessation of refugee status must be the same as those which arise, in relation to the granting of that status, from Article 2(c) of that directive, read together with Article 7(1) and (2) thereof. (2) Article 11(1)(e) of Directive 2004/83, read together with Article 7(2) of that directive, must be interpreted as meaning that any social and financial support provided by private actors, such as the family or the clan of a third country national concerned, falls short of what is required under those provisions to constitute protection and is, therefore, of no relevance either to the assessment of the effectiveness or availability of the protection provided by the State within the meaning of Article 7(1)(a) of that directive, or to the determination, under Article 11(1)(e) of that directive, read together with Article 2(c) thereof, of whether there continues to be a well-founded fear of persecution.

20 January 2021 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Cessation clauses - State protection | Countries: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Submission by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in the case G. v. G.

18 January 2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae

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 | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 2011 Recast Qualification Directive (EU) | Topic(s): Exclusion clauses - Palestinian - Statelessness | Countries: Germany - Lebanon - Syrian Arab Republic

Iraq: Relevant Country of Origin Information to Assist with the Application of UNHCR's Country Guidance on Iraq: Ability of Persons Originating from Formerly ISIS-Held or Conflict-Affected Areas to Legally Access and Remain in Proposed Areas of Internal Relocation

11 January 2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country Reports

Costa Rica: Resolución N° DJUR-01-01-2021-JM

11 January 2021 | Publisher: National Legislative Bodies / National Authorities | Document type: National Legislation

Syrian Arab Republic: Legislative Decree No. 31 of 2020

4 January 2021 | Publisher: National Legislative Bodies / National Authorities | Document type: National Legislation

Technical Guidance: Child Friendly Procedures

2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Operational Guidelines

Amicus curiae of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in case number 20-121835SIV-HRET regarding F.K. and others against the State/the Norwegian Appeals Board before the Supreme Court of Norway (Norges Høyesterett)

16 December 2020 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Court Interventions / Amicus Curiae

YD (ALGERIA) Appellant - and - SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT AND UNITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR REFUGEES Intervener

The issues that arise on this appeal are whether the Upper Tribunal in OO (Algeria) wrongly equated persecution with a risk of being subjected to physical violence and also failed to consider, cumulatively, the impact of the treatment that gay men would face in Algeria. Further, the appeal raises the issues of whether it would be unduly harsh to require the appellant to relocate within Algeria or whether returning him to Algeria would amount to a disproportionate interference with his rights under Article 8 of the Convention given that he would conceal his sexual orientation if he returned to live in Algeria.

14 December 2020 | Judicial Body: United Kingdom: Court of Appeal (England and Wales) | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex (LGBTI) - Persecution on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity | Countries: Algeria - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland

Search Refworld