Strategic litigation, searchable.
356 cases across 14 issue areas. Filter by topic, outcome, or precedent strength. Each profile is a starting point for adaptation, not a finishing line.
- Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2015· European Court of Human Rightsfavorable
CASE OF S.J. v. BELGIUM (no. 70055/10)
Whether the applicant's expulsion to Nigeria would expose him to a real risk of treatment contrary to the prohibition of torture, and whether he had an effective remedy to challenge that risk.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2015· European Court of Human Rightsfavorable
CASE OF NABIL AND OTHERS v. HUNGARY (no. 62116/12)
Whether the applicants' detention pending expulsion and the subsequent expulsion by the Hungarian authorities were compatible with the right to liberty and security.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulement - Australia (National)· 2015· Amnesty Internationalfavorablengo report
Amnesty: A Brighter Tomorrow - Indigenous Kids
Documented crisis in Indigenous youth detention. Mapped 10x overrepresentation pathway from welfare to justice system.
human-rightsindigenous-rightsyouth-justice - Australia (National)· 2015· High Court of AustraliaadverseHigh precedent
CPCF v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2015] HCA 1
Lawfulness of detaining at sea, and taking towards another country, a group of Tamil asylum seekers intercepted en route to Australia.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementimmigration detentioninterception at sea+1 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2015· European Court of Human Rightsadverse
CASE OF TATAR v. SWITZERLAND (no. 65692/12)
Whether the applicant’s expulsion to Turkey would expose him to a real risk of treatment contrary to the Convention’s right to life and absolute prohibition of torture.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2015· European Court of Human Rightsfavorable
CASE OF L.M. AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (no. 40081/14)
Whether the applicants' expulsion to Syria would expose them to a real risk of treatment contrary to the right to life and the prohibition of torture.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2014· European Court of Human Rightsfavorable
CASE OF TARAKHEL v. SWITZERLAND (no. 29217/12)
Whether Switzerland has complied with its obligation under Article 46 to provide information on measures taken to prevent new violations and to pay the sums awarded.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Northern Territory, Australia· 2014· NT Children's CommissionerpendingHigh precedent
NT Tear Gas Incident — Don Dale (2014)
Use of tear gas on children in detention
don-dalenttear-gasuse-of-force - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2014· European Court of Human Rightsfavorable
CASE OF AL NASHIRI v. POLAND (no. 28761/11)
Whether Poland’s actions regarding the applicant’s arrest, detention, rendition and exposure to the death penalty violated his rights under the Convention, particularly the prohibition of torture, the right to liberty, the right to a fair trial, the right to private and family life, the right to an effective remedy and the right to life.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Australia (National)· 2014· High Court of AustraliaadverseHigh precedent
Plaintiff S156/2013 v Minister for Immigration and Border Protection [2014] HCA 22
Validity of the designation of Papua New Guinea as a regional processing country and the removal of asylum seekers there under the Migration Act.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementimmigration detentionoffshore processing+1 - Council of Europe (ECtHR)· 2014· European Court of Human Rightsfavorable
CASE OF HUSAYN (ABU ZUBAYDAH) v. POLAND (no. 7511/13)
Whether Poland's actions violated the applicant's rights, including the prohibition of torture and the right to liberty and security
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementarticle 3 - Australia (National)· 2013· Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committeefavorablesenate inquiry
Senate Inquiry into Justice Reinvestment
First federal parliamentary inquiry into justice reinvestment. Heard evidence from Bourke, international experts, and Aboriginal organisations.
indigenous-rightsjustice-reinvestmentparliamentary-inquiry - Hong Kong· 2013· Hong Kong Court of Final AppealfavorableHigh precedent
C v Director of Immigration [2013] HKCFA 21; (2013) 16 HKCFAR 280 (FACV 18-20/2011)
Whether the duty to assess risk before removal extends beyond torture to a well-founded fear of persecution, when UNHCR (not the government) conducts refugee status determination in Hong Kong.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementtorture (CAT) - Western Australia, Australia· 2013· High Court of AustraliapendingHigh precedent
Munda v Western Australia (2013) HCA 38
Proportionality in sentencing Aboriginal offenders
aboriginalhcaproportionalitysentencing - Australia (National)· 2013· High Court of AustraliafavorableHigh precedent
Bugmy v The Queen (2013) HCA 37
Consideration of Aboriginal disadvantage in sentencing
aboriginal-disadvantagebugmy-principleshcasentencing - European Court of Human Rights· 2012· ECtHR (Grand Chamber)favorableHigh precedent
Hirsi Jamaa and Others v Italy (GC), App No 27765/09
High-seas pushbacks; extraterritorial jurisdiction; collective expulsion
asylumcollective-expulsionextraterritorial-jurisdictionpushbacksrefugee - Hong Kong· 2012· Hong Kong Court of Final AppealfavorableHigh precedent
Ubamaka Edward Wilson v Secretary for Security (2012) 15 HKCFAR 743; [2012] HKCFA 87
Whether the protection against torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (article 3 of the Bill of Rights Ordinance, reflecting ICCPR article 7) is absolute, and whether the Director must assess that risk before removal.
refugeeasylumnon-refoulementtorture (CAT) - Australia (National)· 2011· High Court of AustraliafavorableHigh precedent
Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister for Immigration ('Malaysia Solution')
Offshore transfer to non-signatory 'safe country'; statutory preconditions
asylumoffshore-processingrefugeestatutory-authoritythird-country-transfers - United Kingdom / EU context· 2011· CJEU (Grand Chamber)favorableHigh precedent
N.S. v SSHD; M.E. and Others v Refugee Applications Commissioner (Joined Cases C-411/10 & C-493/10)
Dublin transfers; systemic deficiencies test; suspending transfers
asylumdublin-transfersnon-refoulementrefugeesystemic-deficiencies - Hungary· 2011
Hungary - Metropolitan Court, 22 April 2011, 17.K30.864/2010/18
EDAL summary. The applicant could not substantiate the individual elements of his claim with respect to his well-founded fear of a blood feud; however, he was able to satisfy the criteria for subsidiary protection....
refugeeasylum