[1]
J. Hathaway and M. Foster, The law of refugee status, 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014 [Online]. Available: http://ezproxy.lib.le.ac.uk/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511998300
[2]
H. Storey, ‘“Persecution: Towards a working definition”’, in Research handbook on international law and migration, vol. Research handbooks in international law, V. Chetail and C. Bauloz, Eds. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2014 [Online]. Available: http://ezproxy.lib.le.ac.uk/login?url=http://www.myilibrary.com?id=586122
[3]
A. Zimmermann, The 1951 Convention relating to the status of refugees and its 1967 Protocol: a commentary, vol. Oxford commentaries on international law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.
[4]
M. Foster, International refugee law and socio-economic rights: refuge from deprivation, vol. Cambridge studies in international and comparative law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009.
[5]
‘Teitiota v Chief Executive of the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment [2014] NZCA 173’. [Online]. Available: http://www.refugeeresearch.net/sites/default/files/Teitiota Article.pdf
[6]
R. Dowd, ‘Dissecting Discrimination in Refugee Law: an Analysis of its Meaning and its Cumulative Effect’, International Journal of Refugee Law, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 28–53, 2011, doi: 10.1093/ijrl/eeq043.
[7]
‘Shepherd (Case C‑472/13), CJEU, 26 February 2015’. [Online]. Available: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=162544&pageIndex=0&doclang=en&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=68878
[8]
‘Sepet and another v SSHD [2003] UKHL 15’. [Online]. Available: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/2003/15.html
[9]
‘Gashi (Asylum; Persecution) Kosovo [1996] UKIAT 13695 (22 July 1996)’. [Online]. Available: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIAT/1996/13695.html
[10]
‘Ravichandran v. Secretary of State for the Home Department [1996] Imm AR 97’. [Online]. Available: http://www.refworld.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rwmain?page=search&docid=3ae6b677c&skip=0&query=ravichandran
[11]
‘Shepherd v. Germany (CJEU)’. 26AD [Online]. Available: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?text=&docid=162544&pageIndex=0&doclang=en&mode=lst&dir=&occ=first&part=1&cid=527759
[12]
‘Horvath v. SSHD [2000] UKHL 37’. [Online]. Available: http://www.refworld.org/docid/3ae6b6e04.html
[13]
J. Hathaway and M. Foster, The law of refugee status, 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014 [Online]. Available: http://ezproxy.lib.le.ac.uk/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511998300
[14]
‘Persecution by Non-state Agents: Comparative Judicial Interpretations of the 1951 Refugee Convention’, European Journal of Migration and Law, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 521–532, 2003, doi: 10.1163/157181602763715064.
[15]
Marx, Reinhard, ‘Notion of Persecution by Non-State Agents in German Jurisprudence, The’, Georgetown Immigration Law Journal, vol. 15, 2001 [Online]. Available: http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/geoimlj15&div=28&g_sent=1&collection=journals
[16]
A. Schoenholtz, ‘The New Refugees and the Old Treaty: Persecutors and Persecuted in the Twenty-First Century’ [Online]. Available: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2617336
[17]
‘Januzi v. SSHD [2006] UKHL 5’. [Online]. Available: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/2006/5.html
[18]
B. Ni Ghrainne, ‘The Internal Protection Alternative Inquiry and Human Rights Considerations - Irrelevant or Indispensable?’, International Journal of Refugee Law, vol. 27, no. 1. pp. 29–51, 2015.
[19]
J. Hathaway and M. Foster, The law of refugee status, 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014 [Online]. Available: http://ezproxy.lib.le.ac.uk/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511998300
[20]
R. Marx, ‘The Criteria of Applying the “Internal Flight Alternative” Test in National Refugee Status Determination Procedures’, International Journal of Refugee Law, vol. 14, no. 2 and 3, pp. 179–218, 2002, doi: 10.1093/ijrl/14.2_and_3.179.
[21]
‘M.E. v. Sweden (ECtHR, Fifth Section)’. 26AD [Online]. Available: http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-145018#{%22itemid%22:[%22001-145018%22]}
[22]
‘X, Y and Z, Cases C-199/12 to C-201/12, CJEU, 7 November 2013’. [Online]. Available: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=144215&doclang=EN
[23]
‘Y and Z, Cases C-71/11 and C-99/11, CJEU, 5 September 2012’. [Online]. Available: http://curia.europa.eu/juris/document/document.jsf?docid=126364&doclang=EN
[24]
‘RT (Zimbabwe) v SSHD [2012] UKSC 38’. [Online]. Available: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2012/38.pdf
[25]
‘HJ (Iran) and HT (Cameroon) [2010] UKSC 31’. [Online]. Available: http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2010/31.pdf
[26]
‘Appellant S395/2002 v. Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (High Court of Australia, 9 December 2003)’. [Online]. Available: http://www.refworld.org/docid/3fd9eca84.html
[27]
UNHCR, ‘Guidelines on International Protection No. 9 Sexual Orientation and or Gender Identity’. 23AD [Online]. Available: http://www.refworld.org/pdfid/50348afc2.pdf
[28]
J. Hathaway and J. Pobjoy, ‘“Queer Cases make Bad Law”’, NYU Journal of International Law and Politics, 2012 [Online]. Available: http://nyujilp.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/44.2-Hathaway-Pobjoy.pdf
