Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
Belgium
Country of Decision : Belgium
Court Name : BE: Council for Alien Law Litigation [Conseil du Contentieux des Étrangers - CALL]
Date of decision : 10/12/2020
Type : Judgment
ECLI :
Case Number/Citation/ Document Symbol : No 245933

X (Palestine) v Commissioner General for Refugees and Stateless Persons

Palestine

BE: The CALL held that in the case of multiple habitual residences, the mere fact of not being afraid in one and being able to return there is not enough to consider that an applicant benefits from sufficient protection.

The applicant, of Palestinian origin, has successfully resided in Gaza and in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). In support of his application for international protection, he claims to have experienced problems with Hamas in Gaza and a dispute with his employer in UAE. The applicant does not benefit from UNRWA protection, therefore, his application for international protection was examined under Article 1, section A, of the Geneva Convention.

The Council considered that it was necessary to analyse the application for international protection with regard to his two countries of habitual residence and with reference to § 101 of the UNCHR Guide to Procedures and Criteria, and the Council declared that the fact that the applicant no longer held a residence permit in the UAE in no way affected this point. The Council continued by underlining the fact that a stateless person must demonstrate that he or she fulfils the conditions of the Geneva Convention with regard to just one of his or her countries of habitual residence in order to be recognised as a refugee; it recalled that the mere fact of habitually residing in a country does not imply being entitled to benefit from "protection" in the sense of the Geneva Convention; consequently, in the case of multiple habitual residences, the mere fact of not being afraid in one of his or her habitual countries of residence and being able to return there is not enough to consider that an applicant benefits from sufficient protection, within the sense of the Geneva Convention, faced with a possible fear that exists in another of his or her countries of habitual residence. In this case, the Council recognised the applicant as a refugee who has provided sufficient proof of fearing persecution in Gaza.

Actors of protection; Asylum Procedures/Special Procedures; Palestine; Statelessness ;

Revised Qualification Directive (Directive 2011/95/EU on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as BIP for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection- recast)/or QD 2004/83/EC;

Individual Expert

Belgium, Council for Alien Law Litigation [Conseil du Contentieux des Étrangers - CALL], X (Palestine) v Commissioner General for Refugees and Stateless Persons, No 245933, 10 December 2020. Link redirects to the English summary in the EASO Case Law Database.

https://caselaw.easo.europa.eu/pages/viewcaselaw.aspx?CaseLawID=1589