Hungary - Budapest Administrative and Labour Court, KKF v Bevándorlási és Állampolgársági Hivatal (Office of Immigration and Nationality, OIN) 15.K30.590/2013/5

Country of Decision:
Country of Applicant:
Date of Decision:
21-03-2013
Citation:
15.K30.590/2013/5
Court Name:
Budapest Administrative and Labour Court
National / Other Legislative Provisions:
Hungary - Act LXXX of 2007 on Asylum - Art 6(1)
Hungary - Act LXXX of 2007 on Asylum - Art 7(1)
Hungary - Act LXXX of 2007 on Asylum - Art 8(1)
Hungary - Act LXXX of 2007 on Asylum - Art 68(5)
Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version
Headnote: 

An applicant of Palestinian origin was granted refugee status.  UNWRA assistance ceased for reasons beyond the applicant’s control, and therefore the applicant is entitled ipso facto to the benefits provided by the Convention. Consequently, refugee status must be granted automatically. 

Facts: 

The applicant of Palestinian origin living in a Lebanese refugee camp stated that he left his home due to the security situation in the Beddawi refugee camp as well as harassment and threats from various Palestinian groups holding different views.

The Office of Immigration and Nationality (OIN) rejected the application. In its opinion, according to the correct interpretation of Article 1D of the Geneva Convention, those who voluntarily leave UNWRA’s area of operations are not automatically entitled to international protection; it only opens up the possibility of an asylum procedure. Furthermore, in the applicant’s case, there is no persecution for reasons outlined in the Geneva Convention, and so refugee status does not have to be granted.

Decision & Reasoning: 

When interpreting Article 1D of the Geneva Convention the court considered the judgment reached by the European Court of Justice in the El Kott case as determinative. On this basis it examined whether the applicant did in fact request UNWRA assistance, then whether such assistance had ceased, and whether there were any grounds for exclusion.

The court found that the applicant was a Palestinian refugee registered by UNWRA, who was forced to leave the agency’s area of operations because his personal safety was at serious risk following a series of physical and psychological attacks. Irrespective of the applicant’s efforts and intentions, UNWRA was unable to protect the applicant, and therefore the applicant is entitled ipso facto to the benefits provided by the Geneva Convention and he was recognised as a refugee.

Outcome: 

The court recognised the applicant as a refugee.