Abstract
This article considers Attorney-General v Tamil X, a recent New Zealand Supreme Court decision on refugee status determinations. Specifically, it considers the approach taken to art 1F of the Refugee Convention in decisions on the exclusion of claimants from refugee status. As claims are increasingly affected by art 1F considerations, it is imperative that the law in this complicated area is clear and just. This article traces Tamil X's advancement through the courts, and presents an analysis of the Supreme Court's judgment. The article also recommends some future developments for the jurisprudence on the exclusion clauses, specifically the adoption of a modified version of the ICTY jurisprudence on joint criminal enterprise.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
