Caselaw Database - All Cases

ESCR-Net Caselaw Database: A database on domestic, regional and international decisions regarding Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

The Higher Social Court of North Rhine-Westphalia asked the German Constitutional Court to decide whether the cash benefits for asylum seekers provided under section 3 paragraph 2 of the Asylum Seekers Benefit Act comply with the constitutional right to a minimum standard of living.

The Sarayaku people form one of the oldest settlements of the Kichwa People in the province of Pastaza in the Ecuadorian Amazon, and include approximately 1,300 people. In 1996, Ecuador signed a contract with the Empresa Estatal de Petróleos del Ecuador (PETROECUADOR) and a group formed with CGC (Compañía General de Combustibles, a subsidiary of Chevron, in Argentina) and la Petrolera Ecuador San Jorge S.A. for oil exploration and exploitation in Sarayaku lands.

R.K.B.’s employer accused her of having an affair with a male colleague and dismissed her from the position but did not dismiss the male colleague, and threatened to “spread rumours about her relationships with other men” to pressure her to sign a document, attesting that she had been paid all her benefits upon termination. R.K.B. presented a claim to the Committee, alleging that her employer, a hairdressing salon, had unfairly terminated her contract of employment based on gender stereotypes.

The Brazilian Federal Supreme Court unanimously decided to uphold the constitutionality of racial quotas in University admission processes, in order to create a diverse academic environment, to overcome a history of racial discrimination in Brazil, and to promote the principle of de facto equality as applied to racial discrimination in education.  In addition, the Court addressed issues of proportionality and reasonability as criteria to assess the constitutionality of policies aimed at achieving racial equality.

Petitioners challenged the 2009 decision of the State of Massachusetts to exclude a group of legal immigrants from its Commonwealth Care Health Insurance Program. Plaintiffs alleged that such exclusion violated the Equal Protection Clause recognized by the Constitution of Massachusetts.

The applicant, Ms. N, a Ugandan national, entered the UK in March 1998. She was seriously ill and was diagnosed as HIV positive. She completed an asylum application within a few days, claiming she had been raped by the National Resistance Movement in Uganda because of her association with the Lord's Resistance Army. In August 1998, Ms. N developed Kaposi's sarcoma. In March 2001, a physician prepared an expert report which expressed that without regular antiretroviral treatment and monitoring, the applicant's life expectancy would be less than one year.

This High Court case was brought with the support of Hakijamii, a human rights organization based in Nairobi that has been a member of ESCR-Net since 2005; and stemmed from the request of more than 1,000 individuals, evicted from their homes located in six communities commonly known as the Medina Location of Garissa municipality.

In September 2011, the residents of Langaville Informal Settlement (comprised of more than one thousand and five hundred households and four thousand and six hundred residents) represented by the Socio-Economic Rights Institute of South Africa (SERI), requested an order directing the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality to provide sufficient access to water and basic sanitation recognized in the Constitution of South Africa, through the Water Services Act, Regulation 3 of the Regulations Relating to Compulsory National Standards and Measures to Conserve Water (GN R509 in GG 22355 of 8 June

The petition was presented by advocates of the Nepalese organization, Pro Public, to protect the international and constitutional rights of thousands of women employees working in cabin and dance restaurants and massage parlors. These businesses have spread throughout urban areas in Nepal over the last ten years with women compromising more than 80% of all employees.

The claimants in this joined action were asylum-seekers who had sought asylum after their initial entry to the UK. The defendant, Secretary of State for the Home Department, refused support under Section 55 of the Nationality, Immigration, and Asylum Act 2002 ("the Act") with regard to accommodation. Section 55 allowed refusal of support to asylum seekers who failed to make their claim as soon as reasonably practicable.