Official Journal of the European Union

C series

—

C/2024/4558

29.7.2024

(Case C-563/22, Zamestnik-predsedatel na Darzhavna agentsia za bezhantsite (Refugee status – Stateless persons of Palestinian origin))

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common policy on asylum and subsidiary protection - Directive 2011/95/EU - Article 12 - Exclusion from being a refugee - Person registered with the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (for Palestine Refugees in the Near East) (UNRWA) - Conditions for that person to be entitled ipso facto to the benefits of Directive 2011/95/EU - Cessation of UNRWA’s protection or assistance - Article 4 - General situation prevailing in a sector of UNRWA’s area of operations - Individual assessment of relevant elements - Directive 2013/32/EU - Article 40 - Subsequent application for international protection - New elements - Elements already examined in the final decision on the previous application)

(C/2024/4558)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: SN, LN

Defendant: Zamestnik-predsedatel na Darzhavna agentsia za bezhantsite

Operative part of the judgment

1.Article 40 of Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection, read in conjunction with the second sentence of Article 12(1)(a) of Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection, must be interpreted as meaning that the authority ruling on the merits of a subsequent application for international protection is required to examine the factual elements submitted in support of that application, including when those facts have already been assessed by the authority which definitively rejected a first application for international protection.

2.The second sentence of Article 12(1)(a) of Directive 2011/95 must be interpreted as meaning that the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA)’s protection or assistance, from which an applicant for international protection, a stateless person of Palestinian origin, benefits, must be considered to have ceased within the meaning of that provision when, (i) that body finds itself unable, for whatever reason, including by reason of the general situation in the sector of that body’s area of operations, in which that stateless person had his or her habitual residence, to ensure to that stateless person, taking into account, where applicable, his or her state of vulnerability, dignified living conditions, consistent with its mission, without him or her being required to demonstrate that he or she is specifically targeted by that general situation by reason of elements specific to his or her personal situation, and (ii) that stateless person of Palestinian origin would find himself or herself, if he or she were to return to that sector, in a state of serious insecurity, taking into account, where applicable, his or her state of vulnerability, since the administrative and judicial authorities are required to carry out an individual assessment of each application for international protection based on that provision, within the framework of which the age of the person concerned may be relevant. UNRWA’s assistance or protection must, in particular, be considered to have ceased vis-à-vis the applicant when, for whatever reason, that body is no longer able to provide to any stateless person of Palestinian origin staying in the sector of that body’s area of operations where that applicant had his or her habitual residence, dignified living conditions or minimum security conditions. Whether UNRWA’s protection or assistance must be considered to have ceased must be assessed at the time from which that stateless person left the sector of UNRWA’s area of operations in which he or she had his or her habitual residence, to that when the competent administrative authorities rule on his or her application for international protection or that when the competent court rules on any appeal directed against the decision rejecting that application.

—

Language of the case: Bulgarian

ECLI:EU:C:2024:4558

15