Legal briefing on the rights of stateless Palestinians in the UK September 2025 not confer a right to enter or reside in a given area as that is determined by the host State, which retains authority over immigration and residency matters. 2.1.3. Comparative analysis on the application of Article 1D in European jurisdictions These developments in CJEU jurisprudence reflect developments in other jurisdictions in which domestic courts have acknowledged the inability of UNRWA to fulfil its mandate in certain areas of operation. Applying the SN and LN judgment, in France, the National Court of Asylum granted refugee status on the basis of Article 1D to a Palestinian couple from Gaza and ruled that UNRWA can no longer provide effective assistance and protection for Palestinians residing there.79 In August 2024, the Federal Administrative Court in Austria held that a stateless Palestinian from Syria was to be granted refugee status ipso facto under the inclusion clause of Article 1D due to UNRWA’s inability to provide assistance or protection in the Syrian area of operations.80 In AE (Lebanon)81, the New Zealand Immigration and Protection Tribunal held that a Palestinian previously residing in Lebanon was entitled to refugee protection under Article 1D due to UNRWA’s inability to provide necessary medical treatment, which was potentially life-threatening, and its failure to prevent the applicant from falling into ‘abject poverty’. The Tribunal also adopted a broader interpretation regarding the personal scope of Article 1D and held that it applied to all Palestinians who are or were entitled to receive UNRWA assistance.82 In Belgium, the Council for Aliens Law Litigation (CALL), an asylum appeals body, held in a series of cases in 2021 that, due to the financial difficulties faced by UNRWA, the Agency could not be deemed to be capable of fulfilling its mission in Gaza and Lebanon and therefore UNRWA’s assistance had ceased for the purposes of Article 1D. Thus, Palestinian refugees from either of those areas and registered with UNRWA would be within the scope of the inclusion clause.83 Similarly, in 2020, the Amsterdam District Court found that a Palestinian applicant from Gaza fell under the inclusion clause in Article 1D due to his ‘personal situation of serious insecurity’ on account of UNRWA’s inability to provide adequate humanitarian relief in Gaza.84 2.1.4. Application in the UK Article 1D of the Refugee Convention is reflected in Para 339AA of the Immigration Rules Part 11.85 In 2016, the UK Home Office released guidance on the application of Article 1D in asylum claims, which is to be read in conjunction with the relevant country policy and information note.86 The most recent country policy and information note on the oPt was updated in November 2024 and 79 France, Cour Nationale du Droit d’Asile (CNDA), no. 23042517, no. 23042541, (13 September 2024). See also the recent judgment of the Dutch Council of State which applied the SN and LN and ruled that, in a case concerning a stateless Palestinian from the West Bank, the Minister for Asylum and Migration must consider the conditions in the area of operation at the time of the decision and not only at the time of the individuals departure. See The Netherlands, Council of State, case no. 202307092/1/V2 (7 May 2025). 80 Austria, Federal Administrative Court, Bundesamt für Fremdenwesen und Asyl‚ BFA, L512 2276189-1 (2 August 2024). 81 New Zealand Immigration and Protection Tribunal, AE (Lebanon) [2019] NZIPT 801588 (28 May 2019). 82 ibid, para 41, citing New Zealand Immigration and Protection Tribunal, AD (Palestine) [2015] NZIPT 800693–695 (23 December 2015). 83 ENS and BADIL, Palestinians and the Search for Protection (fn 4) p 34. See Belgium, Council for Aliens Law Litigation, judgment no. 249 784 (24 February 2021); Belgium, Council for Aliens Law Litigation, judgment no. 249 930 (25 February 2021); Belgium. Council for Aliens Law Litigation, judgment no. 250 868 (11 March 2021). 84 The Netherlands, Amsterdam District Court Den Haag, NL20.6600 (24 August 2020) para 7.1. Note however, the judge goes on to incorrectly apply the exclusion clause, holding that the applicant’s claim should be assessed under Article 1A(2) rather than granted refugee status ipso facto in accordance with the second paragraph of Article 1D. 85 UK Immigration Rules Part 11: Asylum. 86 UK Home Office, Asylum Policy Instruction - Article 1D (fn 57); UK Home Office, Country Policy and Information Note: Humanitarian Situation in Gaza, Occupied Palestinian Territories (November 2024); UK Home Office, Country Policy and Information Note: Lebanon: Palestinians (March 2024). 20