Claimed cases: results
4 claimed cases found:
Your search returned 4 results in total.
| CUREDI ID | Question at stake | Country | Official Citation | Date of decision | Author | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CUREDI013UK006 | Whether, under the Refugee Convention, women and girls from Ethiopia constitute a particular social group (PSG) and, if they do, whether relocation to another part of Ethiopia should be seen as a feasible option for them to pursue if seeking refuge. | United Kingdom | RG (Ethiopia) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [2006] EWCA Civ 339 |
2006-04-04 | Katia Bianchini |
View |
| CUREDI041UK012 | 1) Whether the appellant, a divorced woman with an illegitimate child previously subjected to domestic violence, would upon return to Bangladesh face a real risk of persecution under the Refugee Convention or treatment contrary to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), 2) Whether removing the appellant from the UK would be in breach of her and her first child’s rights under Article 8 of the ECHR, and 3) Whether internal relocation would be possible for her and her second child. | United Kingdom | SA (Divorced Woman – Illegitimate child) Bangladesh CG [2011] UKUT 00254 (IAC) |
2011-07-11 | Iulia Mirzac |
View |
| CUREDI041UK014 | 1) Whether “women in the Ivory Coast” form a particular social group (PSG) under the Refugee Convention. 2) Whether the appellant– a Muslim woman with an illegitimate child and a victim of female genital mutilation (FGM), forced marriage, and domestic violence – would upon return to the Ivory Coast face a real risk of persecution under the Refugee Convention or treatment contrary to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). 3) Whether the removal of the appellant and her child from the UK would be in breach of their rights under Article 8 of the ECHR, and 4) Whether sufficient protection and internal relocation would be available for them within the Ivory Coast. | United Kingdom | MD (Women) Ivory Coast v SSHD CG [2010] UKUT 215 (IAC) |
2010-07-07 | Iulia Mirzac |
View |
| CUREDI041UK020 | 1) Whether the Family Court has jurisdiction to make a Forced Marriage Protection Order (FMPO*) where the person requiring protection is an adult with mental capacity to make relevant decisions and opposing the FMPO, and whether an indefinite ‘passport order’ could be made as part of the FMPO. 2) What approach shall the Family Court take when balancing the right to be protected under Article 3 and right to private and family life under Article 8 of the ECHR. | United Kingdom | Re K (Forced Marriage: Passport Order) 2020 EWCA Civ 190 |
2020-02-21 | Iulia Mirzac |
View |