Last Updated: Wednesday, 23 January 2019, 15:06 GMT
Latest Refworld Updates for Russian Federation RSS feed

Russian Federation - flag Russian Federation

Selected filters: Legal Information
Filter:
Showing 1-10 of 490 results
case of M.A. and Others v. Lithuania (app no. 59793/17)

whether the applicants had actually submitted asylum applications at the border - the Court was satisfied that the applicants had submitted asylum applications, either orally or in writing, at the Lithuanian border on 16 April, 11 May and 22 May 2017. However, border guards had not accepted those applications and had not forwarded them to a competent authority for examination and status determination, as required by domestic law. Furthermore, border guards’ reports to their senior officers had not made any mention of the applicants’ wish to seek asylum on any of the three occasions – there were no references to the writing of “azul” on the decisions, nor to the written asylum application. There was also no indication either in those reports or in any other documents submitted to the Court that the border guards had attempted to clarify what was the reason – if not seeking asylum – for the applicants’ presence at the border without valid travel documents. Nor did it appear that there had been any assessment at all of whether it had been safe to return the applicants – a family with five very young children – to Belarus, which was not a Contracting Party to the European Convention on Human Rights and, according to publicly available information, could not be assumed to be a safe third country for Chechen asylum-seekers. As a result, the applicants had been returned to Belarus without there being any assessment of their asylum claims. It was therefore evident that measures which the Government had claimed constituted adequate safeguards against the arbitrary removal of asylum-seekers – such as the supervision of border guards by superior officers or the monitoring of borders by non-governmental organisations – had not been effective in the applicants’ case. Conclusion: violation (four votes to three).

11 December 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Rejection at border | Countries: Lithuania - Russian Federation

CASE OF A.N. AND OTHERS v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 61689/16 and 3 others – see appended list)

Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Extradition) (Conditional) (Tajikistan) Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Extradition) (Conditional) (Uzbekistan) Violation of Article 5 - Right to liberty and security (Article 5-1-f - Extradition)

23 October 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment | Countries: Russian Federation - Tajikistan - Uzbekistan

CASE OF ALPEYEVA AND DZHALAGONIYA v. RUSSIA (Applications nos. 7549/09 and 33330/11)

Due to the authorities mishandling of procedures related to the granting of citizenship, the applicants had found themselves not only in a situation comparable to that in the Smirnova case, but also faced consequences affecting their social identity far more fundamentally as they had been deprived of any legal status in Russia. They had become stateless persons and remained so until 2010 and 2013 respectively. It had taken the authorities from 2007 until 2013 for the general problem to be solved. Since the authorities’ oversight had resulted in consequences for the applicants so severely affecting their private life, it amounted to an arbitrary interference. The authorities had thus failed to act diligently.

12 June 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Passports - Statelessness | Countries: Russian Federation

CASE OF IBROGIMOV v. RUSSIA (Application no. 32248/12)

in the light of the overwhelming European and international consensus geared towards abolishing the outstanding restrictions on entry, stay and residence of HIV-positive non nationals who constitute a particularly vulnerable group, the respondent Government failed in their duty to put forward compelling reasons or any objective justification for their differential treatment for health reason

15 May 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Expulsion - HIV and AIDS | Countries: Russian Federation - Uzbekistan

CASE OF MAINOV v. RUSSIA (Application no. 11556/17)

detention under Article 5 § 1 (f) of the Convention must be carried out in good faith; it must be closely connected to the ground of detention relied on by the Government; the place and conditions of detention should be appropriate; and the length of the detention should not exceed that reasonably required for the purpose pursued

15 May 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Statelessness | Countries: Russian Federation

CASE OF BISTIEVA AND OTHERS v. POLAND (Application no. 75157/14)

violation of article 8 - child’s best interests cannot be confined to keeping the family together - detention is mesure of last resort -consideration should be given to alternative measures - detention of minors called for greater speed and diligence on the part of the authorities

10 April 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Right to family life | Countries: Germany - Poland - Russian Federation

Decision N° 15033491

national protection (tolerated stay) granted in an EU Member State does not obstruct the assessment of an asylum claim by the court

3 April 2018 | Judicial Body: France: Cour nationale du droit d'asile | Document type: Case Law | Topic(s): Humanitarian protection (including tolerated stay) | Countries: France - Poland - Russian Federation

CASE OF MSKHILADZE v. RUSSIA (Application no. 47741/16)

- detention arbitrary since it should have been clear to the authorities that removal was impracticable - violation of Article 5 § 4 of the Convention on account of the lack of a possibility to take proceedings for review of the continued detention

13 February 2018 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Arbitrary arrest and detention - Statelessness | Countries: Russian Federation

A.L. v Russia

30 November 2017 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Complementary forms of protection - Expulsion - Refoulement | Countries: Russian Federation - South Sudan

K.I. v. Russia

7 November 2017 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Document type: Case Law | Legal Instrument: 1950 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) | Topic(s): Expulsion - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Non-refoulement - Right to liberty and security | Countries: Russian Federation - Tajikistan

Search Refworld