In both Case C‑374/22 and Case C‑614/22, the request has been made in proceedings between XXX, a Guinean national residing in Belgium, and the Commissioner-General for Refugees and Stateless Persons (Belgium) concerning the latter’s decision to reject the application for international protection lodged by XXX in that Member State.

The Court of Justice recalled that Directive 2011/95 does not provide for the extension, as a derived right, of refugee status or subsidiary protection status to the family members of a person to whom that status is granted and who, individually, do not satisfy the conditions for granting that status. The Court added that, from Article 23 of that directive, it merely requires the Member States to amend their national laws so that those family members are entitled, in accordance with national procedures and in so far as that is compatible with the personal legal status of those family members, to certain benefits which include, inter alia, a residence permit, access to employment or to education, which are intended to maintain family unity.

EU law does not preclude a Member State, under more favourable national provisions, such as those referred to in Article 3 of Directive 2011/95, from granting, as a derived right and for the purpose of maintaining family unity, refugee status to the ‘family members’ of a beneficiary of such protection, provided, however, that that is compatible with that directive. That remains, however, an option for the Member States, which, as is apparent from the request for a preliminary ruling and from the documents before the Court, the Belgian legislature has not exercised in respect of the family members of a beneficiary of international protection who do not individually qualify for such protection.

For further information, please read the judgement in Case C‑374/22 and in Case C‑614/22.