There are numerous online databases that are searchable for case law. The following sites provide access to credible and authoritative sources for case law across the world. Especially in common law jurisdictions (those based on the British legal system), these sites will provide useful precedents upon which to present a case before a court or decision-maker.
This site is maintained by the Office of the UNHCR. It contains over 7,000 judicial decisions from a large number of jurisdictions. Most of the cases are from higher courts and are therefore likely to be more persuasive to future courts and decision-makers. It has a search function that allows filtering by country of origin of the refugee claimant as well as country of the decision.
These two databases are compiled by INTERIGHTS, the International Centre for the Legal Protection of Human Rights, and made freely available on their website. One covers human rights decisions in the courts of Commonwealth countries and the other covers the decisions of international courts and tribunals. The databases can be searched separately or together. There is a summary of each case and some judgments are available in full.
A free global legislation database which lists case law, legislation, law firms, law schools, law journals and articles by country, with listings for every country in the world.
WorldLII
http://www.austlii.edu.au/catalog/3061.html
This website combines legal resources from 123 jurisdictions. It has a searchable database of case law as well as legislation. At the time of writing, it had resources, including case law, from Australia, Belgium, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Canada, Denmark, East Timor, Japan, Moldova, Mongolia, New Zealand, Norway, Palestinian Autonomous Territories, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United States of America and Venezuela. This site is the best site for searching Australian refugee case law.
International Refugee Case Law
http://refugeecaselaw.org/guidedsearch.asp
This website provides access to case law from Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, the United States and 28 other Northern asylum countries. It allows for searching by country of origin, time period and by ‘concept’.
Asylum Law
http://asylumlaw.org/
This site provides access to case law, organized by country and theme, from 35 countries. The themes include HIV, sexual minorities, gender and children.
NYU GlobaLex
http://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/index.html
GlobaLex is an electronic legal publication dedicated to international and foreign law research, published by the Hauser Global Law School Program at NYU School of Law. GlobaLex is committed to the dissemination of high-level international, foreign, and comparative law research tools in order to accommodate the needs of an increasingly global educational and practicing legal world.
Legislation Online
http://www.legislationline.org/search
This website provides access to European materials on refugees. To access them, go to the search function and type ‘refugee’ in the text field, Select ‘Migration’ as the topic and ‘Legal opinion’ as the type to gain access to decisions regarding refugees from
European Court of Human Rights
http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/search.asp?skin=hudoc-in-en
Inter-American Court of Human Rights
http://www.corteidh.or.cr/bus_temas.cfm
Both the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights have made a large number of decisions involving asylum and refugee claims. These decisions can be sourced through the search functions available at these links.
New Zealand Refugee Law
www.refugee.org.nz/
This website gives access to New Zealand case law. It offers full-text decisions of decisions from superior courts and initial decision makers.
Kenyan Refugee Law
www.kenyalaw.org/CaseSearch/
This website provides access to superior court decisions. There are very few reported decisions on refugees available but this is the most authoritative source for them.
- Ruling in which the Judge ruled that customary international law of non-refoulement did not constitute a legal norm and has no application in Hong Kong domestic law.
- Refused to recognise the right of non-refoulement.
- Also ruled that Hong Kong courts may rely on the UNHCR’s determination of whether a refugee has a well-founded fear of persecution.
The following four cases have been the impetus for the unprecedented
“Joint Position Paper from the Law Society of Hong Kong and the Hong Kong Bar Association on the Framework for Convention Against Torture (“CAT”) Claimants and Asylum Seekers”, 31st March 2009...
- Challenge against the Government’s reliance on UNHCR decisions to meet its obligations under the Convention Against Torture.
- The case which forced the Government to conduct its own assessment of claims under the Convention Against Torture.
C & Ors v Director of Immigration & Secretary for Security (HCAL 132/2006, Court of First Instance judgment dated 18th February 2008 – pending appeal)
- Challenge against the Government’s refusal to assess refugee claims, as required under customary international law.
- Held that non-refoulement is a matter of customary international law (although found that HKSAR had persistently objected against it).
- Held that the Government’s administrative detention of claimants under the Convention Against Torture was unlawful because it did not make the grounds and procedure for detention certain and accessible, as required by the Hong Kong Bill of Rights Ordinance.
- The same principle would arguably apply to refugee claimants.
- Challenge against the Government’s unfair assessment system of claims under the Convention Against Torture.
- Resulted in an independent appeal tribunal system and government funded legal representation.
Case Law
