full screen background image


21 September 2017 - October 5 & 6, 2017: ‘International Investment Law & the Law of Armed Conflict’ Colloquium on ‘International Inve ... +++ 21 September 2017 - 5 & 6 Οκτωβρίου 2017: International Investment Law & the Law of Armed Conflict 5 & 6 Οκτωβρίου 2017: ... +++ 29 April 2017 - Summer School on European Business Law, Corfu 2017, 24-28 Ιουλίου Το “Summer School” αποτε ... +++ 3 May 2016 - Εκδηλώσεις Τομέα Διεθνών Σπουδών – Κατεύθυνση Ι.Δ.Δ. ΑΝΑΚΟΙΝΩΣΗ Ο Καθηγ ... +++ 30 April 2016 - 9.5.2016: Ημερίδα – Το Πρόσωπο και η Οικογένεια στο Δίκαιο και την Κοινωνία   Το Ελληνικό Τμή ... +++ 30 March 2016 - 14th ICC Miami Conference on International Arbitration This conference provides an indispe ... +++

*Law of Aliens

Published on June 12th, 2018 | by Georgia Archonti


CJEU: Opinion AG Mengozzi in Case C-585/16 Alheto, 17 May 2018

On 17 May 2018, Advocate General Mengozzi delivered his opinion in Case C-585/16 Alheto, which concerns the interpretation of Article 12(1)(a) of the recast Qualification Directive and the recast Asylum Procedures Directive in a case concerning a stateless woman from Palestine who is registered as a refugee with the UNRWA and whose application for asylum in Bulgaria was denied.

Firstly, AG Mengozzi recalled that the preliminary questions had to be answered in the light of the 1951 Refugee Convention, the cornerstone of international protection, and, more specifically to the case in question, its Article 1D. In his opinion, while this article establishes an exclusion clause for those who are “receiving protection or assistance” from UN organs or agencies other than UNHCR, such as the UNRWA, that same article contains an inclusion clause for those who, for any reason, no longer receive that protection. According to the Advocate General, when a person who has been recognised as a refugee by the UNRWA applies for international protection in a Member State, it suffices for national authorities to examine the discontinuity of the protection or assistance once granted by UNRWA, be it due to armed conflicts or to a general situation of violence or insecurity making that protection or assistance ineffective, which led the person concerned to leave the area of operation of that agency. It would not be necessary, therefore, for such an asylum applicant to demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution, as his or her refugee status was already recognised by the UNRWA.

Secondly, in the Advocate General’s opinion, Article 12(1)(a) of the recast Qualification Directive contains a sufficiently precise and unconditional provision which can be directly relied upon before national courts. The fact that a party concerned has not raised such a provision of direct effect during the court proceedings is not a bar to a national judge to apply that provision if deemed necessary.

For further information click here

About the Author

Back to Top ↑