# C_2021062EN.01001102.xml

| 22.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 62/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 62/11

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) (United Kingdom) made on 29 July 2020 — NB, AB v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Intervenor: United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

(Case C-349/20)

(2021/C 62/12)

Language of the case: English

Referring court

First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: NB, AB

Respondent: Secretary of State for the Home Department

Intervenor: United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

Questions referred

In assessing whether there has been a cessation of protection or assistance from UNRWA (1) within the meaning of the second sentence of Article 12(1) (a) of the QD (2) to an UNRWA-registered stateless Palestinian in respect of the assistance afforded to disabled persons:

| 1. | Is the assessment purely an historic exercise of considering the circumstances which are said to have forced an applicant to leave the UNRWA area of operations when he did, or is it also an ex nunc, forward-looking assessment of whether the applicant can avail himself of such protection or assistance presently? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is the assessment purely an historic exercise of considering the circumstances which are said to have forced an applicant to leave the UNRWA area of operations when he did, or is it also an ex nunc, forward-looking assessment of whether the applicant can avail himself of such protection or assistance presently?

| 2. | If the answer to Question 1 is that assessment includes a forward-looking assessment, is it legitimate to rely analogically on the cessation clause in Article 11, so that where historically the applicant can show a qualifying reason as to why he or she left the UNRWA area, the evidential burden falls upon the Member State to show that such reason no longer holds? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to Question 1 is that assessment includes a forward-looking assessment, is it legitimate to rely analogically on the cessation clause in Article 11, so that where historically the applicant can show a qualifying reason as to why he or she left the UNRWA area, the evidential burden falls upon the Member State to show that such reason no longer holds?

| 3. | In order for there to be justifiable objective reasons for the departure of such a person related to UNRW[A]'s provision of protection or assistance, is it necessary to establish intentional infliction of harm or deprivation of assistance (by act or omission) on the part of UNRWA or the state in which it operates? |
| --- | --- |

3.

In order for there to be justifiable objective reasons for the departure of such a person related to UNRW[A]'s provision of protection or assistance, is it necessary to establish intentional infliction of harm or deprivation of assistance (by act or omission) on the part of UNRWA or the state in which it operates?

| 4. | Is it relevant to take into account the assistance provided to such persons by civil society actors such as NGOs? |
| --- | --- |

4.

Is it relevant to take into account the assistance provided to such persons by civil society actors such as NGOs?

---

(1)  United Nations Relief and Works Association.

(2)  Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted (the Qualification Directive; hereafter: ‘QD’)(OJ 2004, L 304, p. 12).

---