Last Updated: Wednesday, 17 May 2023, 15:20 GMT
Refworld Home
Latest Refworld Updates for Georgia RSS feed

Georgia - flag Georgia

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

Filter:
Showing 1-10 of 2,978 results
#IBelong Campaign Update, October-December 2022

13 February 2023 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports

AFFAIRE M.K. ET AUTRES c. FRANCE (Requêtes nos 34349/18, 34638/18 et 35047/18)

The ECtHR considered it more appropriate to examine the complaints concerning the failure of France to comply with the interim relief orders of the Administrative Court ordering that the applicants must be taken into emergency accommodation and the absence of an effective emergency procedure for the enforcement of an interim relief order solely under Article 6 ECHR (§§ 91, 92). The ECtHR considered that the decision to grant or refuse emergency accommodation constituted a civil right and thus held that Article 6 § 1 ECtHR was applicable. The case concerned asylum-seekers who were without accommodation at the time of the events, and in whose favour the urgent-applications judge of the administrative court ordered the State to provide them with emergency accommodation.

30 December 2022 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Decision on admissibility - Effective remedy - Exhaustion of domestic remedies - Rule of law / Due process / Procedural fairness | Countries: Congo, Democratic Republic of the - France - Georgia

#IBelong Campaign Update, July-September 2022

6 December 2022 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports

SI, TL, ND, VH, YT, HN v Bundesrepublik Deutschland, REQUEST for a preliminary ruling, Case C‑497/21

Article 33(2)(d) of Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection, read in conjunction with Article 2(q) thereof and Article 2 of Protocol (No 22) on the position of Denmark annexed to the EU Treaty and to the FEU Treaty, must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State other than the Kingdom of Denmark which provides for the possibility of rejecting as inadmissible, in whole or in part, an application for international protection within the meaning of Article 2(b) of that directive, which has been made to that Member State by a national of a third country or a stateless person whose previous application for international protection, made to the Kingdom of Denmark, has been rejected by the latter Member State.

22 September 2022 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 2013 Dublin III Regulation (EU) | Topic(s): Decision on admissibility - International protection - Safe third country | Countries: Denmark - Georgia - Germany

#IBelong Campaign Update, April-June 2022

5 August 2022 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports

#IBelong Campaign Update, October – December 2021

1 February 2022 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports

#IBelong Campaign Update, July – September 2021

20 October 2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Thematic Reports

#IBelong Campaign Update, April 2021 - June 2021

9 July 2021 | Publisher: UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) | Document type: Country News

AFFAIRE N.H. ET AUTRES c. FRANCE (Requête no 28820/13 et 2 autres)

The French authorities had failed in their duties under domestic law. They were found responsible for the conditions in which the applicants had been living for several months: sleeping rough, without access to sanitary facilities, having no means of subsistence and constantly in fear of being attacked or robbed. The applicants had thus been victims of degrading treatment, showing a lack of respect for their dignity. The Court found that such living conditions, combined with the lack of an appropriate response from the French authorities and the fact that the domestic courts had systematically objected that the competent bodies lacked resources in the light of their status as single young men, had exceeded the threshold of severity for the purposes of Article 3 of the Convention. The three applicants N.H., K.T. and A.J. had thus found themselves, through the fault of the French authorities, in a situation that was incompatible with Article 3 of the Convention.

2 July 2020 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Reception - Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures | Countries: Afghanistan - France - Georgia - Iran, Islamic Republic of - Russian Federation

Good Practices Paper – Action 6: Establishing Statelessness Determination Procedures to Protect Stateless Persons

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

Search Refworld

Advanced Search | Search Tips
UNHCR logo