12. Claims for international protection

2021 ◽  
pp. 435-495
Author(s):  
Gina Clayton ◽  
Georgina Firth ◽  
Caroline Sawyer ◽  
Rowena Moffatt
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Causal Link ◽  
Parallel Process ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
Legal Context ◽  
The Status ◽  
Gender Based ◽  
The Uk

This chapter examines the requirements for refugee status, according to Article 1A of the UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 and the Refugee Qualification Directive EC 2004/83, referred to as the Qualification Directive. This includes case law on the main concepts in refugee law: well-founded fear, persecution, Convention reason, causal link, and internal relocation. There is a focus on the particular problems in gender-based claims. The chapter considers protection for victims of trafficking, who may go through a parallel process to the asylum system. The chapter begins with the legal context of refugee claims in the UK, and then follows the structure of Article 1A of the Refugee Convention.

12. Claims for international protection

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gina Clayton ◽  
Georgina Firth ◽  
Caroline Sawyer ◽  
Rowena Moffatt ◽  
Helena Wray
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
Causal Link ◽  
Parallel Process ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
International Protection ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
System P ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Law ◽  
Gender Based

Course-focused and comprehensive, the Textbook on series provides an accessible overview of the key areas on the law curriculum. This chapter examines the requirements for refugee status, according to Article 1A of the UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees 1951 and the Refugee Qualification Directive EC 2004/83, referred to as the Qualification Directive. This includes case law on the main concepts in refugee law: well-founded fear, persecution, Convention reason, causal link, and internal relocation. There is a focus on the particular problems in gender-based claims. The chapter considers protection for victims of trafficking, who may go through a parallel process to the asylum system.

The UK courts and EU law post-Brexit

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. Christopher-Vajda
Author(s):  
Christopher Vajda
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Transition Period ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Eu Law ◽  
National Courts ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Court Of Appeal

Following the expiry on 31 December 2020 of the ‘transition period’ under the UK/EU Withdrawal Agreement, the relationship between UK and EU law had changed. Whilst much EU legislation at that date will continue to apply in UK law as ‘retained EU law’ and judgments of the EU courts handed down before that date will remain binding on UK courts as ‘retained EU case law’, the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court can depart from that case law. Whilst EU court judgments handed down after that date are not binding on UK courts, they may be taken into account. This article considers both the status of EU retained case law and when the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal may depart from it, and the future of EU law that is not ‘retained EU case law’ and how judgments of the European Courts and national courts of its Member States may influence UK judges in the future.

Canadian Exclusion Jurisprudence post-Febles

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Molly Joeck
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Asylum Seekers ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Refugee Protection ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
International Refugee Law

Abstract This article examines the state of Canadian refugee law since the decision of the Supreme Court in Febles v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) [2014] 3 SCR 431. Drawing upon an analysis of a set of decisions of the Immigration and Refugee Board, the administrative tribunal tasked with refugee status determination in Canada, the article seeks to determine whether administrative decision makers are heeding the guidance of Febles when excluding asylum seekers from refugee protection on the basis of serious criminality pursuant to article 1F(b) of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. In doing so, it examines the controversy around article 1F(b) since its inception across various jurisdictions and amongst academic commentators, situating Febles within that controversy in order to demonstrate that the Supreme Court’s reluctance to clearly set out the purpose underlying article 1F(b) is in step with a longstanding tendency to understand the provision as serving a gatekeeping function, that prevents criminalized non-citizens from obtaining membership in our society. It argues that by omitting to set out a clear and principled standard by which asylum seekers can be excluded from refugee protection pursuant to article 1F(b), the Supreme Court failed to live up to a thick understanding of the rule of law. It concludes by calling for a reassertion of the rule of law into exclusion decision making, both nationally and internationally, in order to ensure that the legitimacy of the international refugee law regime is maintained.

13. Exclusion from asylum

2021 ◽  
pp. 496-516
Author(s):  
Gina Clayton ◽  
Georgina Firth ◽  
Caroline Sawyer ◽  
Rowena Moffatt
Keyword(s):  
Host Country ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Case Law ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Refugee Status ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
Immigration And Asylum ◽  
The Uk ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter considers the provisions whereby an individual can be excluded from refugee status because of their conduct. These are as laid down in the Refugee Convention and the EC Qualification Directive. These powers were little used in the twentieth century, but now are used increasingly often in the context of the escalation in international action against terrorism. Their interpretation and application are affected by domestic legislation, in the UK, the Nationality Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, the Immigration Asylum and Nationality Act 2006, and the Terrorism Acts of 2000 and 2006, and draw on international criminal law. The chapter discusses up-to-date case law on exclusion from refugee status based on crimes against humanity, serious non-political crimes, and acts against the purpose and principles of the United Nations. It deals with the issue of complicity and the relationship with the UK’s anti-terrorism legislation. It also deals with the situations in which refugees can be removed from the host country.

scholarly journals Revitalizing International Protection: The UNHCR's Global Consultations

Refuge ◽  
2001 ◽  
pp. 5-7
Author(s):  
Judith Kumin
Keyword(s):  
International Protection ◽  
Refugee Law ◽  
High Commissioner ◽  
The Status ◽  
And Migration ◽  
The Way

This article explains why the un High Commissioner for Refugees is convening Global Consultations on “revitalizing the international protection regime.” These consultations, which will take place throughout 2001 and probably beyond, will involve state parties to the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 protocol, as well as non-signatory states, non-governmental groups, academics, and practitioners of refugee law. The consultations are intended to result in a reaffirmation of the 1951 convention, and in consensus on some of the more complex interpretative aspects of that instrument. They should show the way on thorny problems faced by states in dealing with refugee and migration challenges today.

24. Citizenship of the European Union

EU Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 921-962
Author(s):  
Paul Craig ◽  
Gráinne de Búrca
Keyword(s):  
Case Law ◽  
European Court Of Justice ◽  
Free Movement ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Uk

All books in this flagship series contain carefully selected substantial extracts from key cases, legislation, and academic debate, providing students with a stand-alone resource. This chapter reviews EU citizenship law. It considers the rights of free movement and residence of EU citizens, political rights of citizenship, and Directive 2004/38 on the rights of free movement and residence for EU citizens and their families. The status of EU citizenship created by EU law has been criticized on various grounds, including the thinness of the rights created and their economic focus, the conditions to which they are subject, the reinforcement of the distinction between third-country nationals and EU nationals, the limited impact of the new electoral rights, and the reluctant pace of implementation. On the other hand, the legal rights of citizenship have been expanded by the European Court of Justice, even in the face of vocal Member State opposition. The case law in this area continues to develop and the chapter provides a considered evaluation of this difficult body of law. The UK version contains a further section analysing issues concerning EU conceptions of citizenship and the UK post-Brexit.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document