Strategic litigation, searchable.
87 cases across 14 issue areas. Filter by topic, outcome, or precedent strength. Each profile is a starting point for adaptation, not a finishing line.
- European Union (CJEU)· 2026· CJEU
C-404/26
This case concerned the application of European Union law in the areas of border control, asylum procedures, and general immigration policy.
bordersasylumimmigrationasylum-policy - European Union (CJEU)· 2026· Court of Justice of the European Union
C-125/26
CJEU case. Subject matter: Borders, asylum and immigration; asylum policy.
borders-asylum-and-immigrationasylum-policy - European Union· 2026· CJEU
C-21/26
CJEU case. Subject matter: Borders, asylum and immigration; asylum policy.
bordersasylum-and-immigrationasylum-policy - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2026favorable
CASE OF J.B. v. GREECE (no. 54796/16)
Whether the applicant's expulsion from Greece would expose him to a real risk of treatment contrary to the prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - European Union· 2026· Court of Justice of the European Union
Fisnoix C-333/26
This case concerns legal questions regarding borders, asylum, and immigration policy within the European Union.
bordersasylumimmigrationasylum-policy - European Union· 2026· Court of Justice of the European Union
C-223/26
This case concerned issues relating to borders, asylum, and immigration policy within the European Union.
bordersasylumimmigrationasylum-policy - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2026
CASE OF O.H. AND OTHERS v. SERBIA (no. 57185/17)
European Court of Human Rights judgment. Articles: 35, 35-3-a, P4-4, 3, 5, 5-1, 5-2, 5-4, 41, 37, 37-1, 37-1-a, 34. Conclusion: Remainder inadmissible (Art. 35) Admissibility criteria;(Art. 35-3-a) Manifestly ill-founded;Violation of Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 - Prohibition of collective expulsion of aliens - {general} (Artic.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2026favorable
CASE OF D.M. v. SWEDEN (no. 32694/23)
Whether the applicant's expulsion to Afghanistan would expose him to a real risk of treatment contrary to the prohibition of torture under Article 3.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2025favorable
CASE OF KUNSHUGAROV v. TÜRKİYE (no. 60811/15)
Whether Turkey's extradition of the applicant to a country where he faced a real risk of torture and the conditions of his detention violated the prohibition of torture and the right to liberty.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2025High precedent
CASE OF A.R.E. v. GREECE (no. 15783/21)
Whether the applicant's expulsion to Türkiye and the conditions of his detention, together with the absence of an effective remedy, breached his rights under the prohibition of torture, the right to liberty and the right to an effective remedy.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2025
CASE OF H.Q. AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY (no. 46084/21)
Whether the applicants' removal to Serbia by Hungary would constitute a prohibited collective expulsion and expose them to a real risk of treatment contrary to the absolute prohibition of torture.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3article 4 prot 4 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2025favorable
CASE OF A.B. AND Y.W. v. MALTA (no. 2559/23)
Whether the applicants’ removal to China would expose them to a real risk of treatment prohibited by Article 3 (the absolute prohibition of torture).
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2025
CASE OF Y.K. v. CROATIA (no. 38776/21)
Whether the applicant’s removal to North Macedonia would expose him to a real risk of treatment contrary to the prohibition of torture, and whether the domestic system provided an effective remedy for that risk.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Australia (National)· 2025· Productivity CommissionfavorableHigh precedentstatistical report
ROGS Youth Justice - Productivity Commission Annual
Annual national benchmarking: $644M nationally, 66% detention vs 30% community. 734 children detained. Indigenous 23x overrepresented.
datafundingyouth-justice - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2025
CASE OF H.A. AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY (no. 39498/18)
Whether Hungary has taken effective measures to prevent new violations of the Convention and complied with the Court's judgment by paying the awarded compensation.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - European Union· 2025· CJEU
C-706/25
CJEU case. Subject matter: Borders, asylum and immigration; asylum policy.
borders-asylum-and-immigrationasylum-policy - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2025adverse
CASE OF Z AND OTHERS v. FINLAND (no. 42758/23)
Whether Finland's measures violated the applicants' right to respect for private and family life.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - ACT, Australia· 2025· ACT Legislative AssemblyfavorableHigh precedentlegislative reform
ACT Raises Age of Criminal Responsibility to 14
First Australian jurisdiction to raise minimum age to 14 (July 2025). Evidence from health, neuroscience, and human rights.
age-of-responsibilityyouth-justice - European Union· 2025· Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU)
C-675/25
CJEU case. Subject matter: Borders, asylum and immigration; asylum policy.
asylum-policybordersimmigration - European Union (CJEU)· 2025· Court of Justice of the European Union
C-747/25
CJEU case. Subject matter: Borders, asylum and immigration; asylum policy.
asylum-policybordersimmigration