A Syrian family from the Rif of Aleppo fled from Syria to Turkey in 2012. There, after being heard by UNHCR and by the OFPRA as part of a resettlement program, the family was admitted to France where the OFPRA granted them subsidiary protection.

The applicants applied to the CNDA for automatic recognition of refugee status in France, pursuant to Article L. 511-1, 2° of the CESEDA, on the grounds that they had been placed under the "strict mandate" of the UNHCR under Article 6 A ii) of its Statute as adopted by the UN General Assembly.

After an investigative measure addressed to the UNHCR, which did not confirm that the family benefited from the strict mandate, the CNDA ruled that although the UNHCR considered that the interested parties satisfied the criteria of Article 1 A 2 of the Geneva Convention and that they could as such be admitted to the resettlement program, such admission is not to be confused with placement under a UNHCR mandate.

The court held that although the applicants benefited from a resettlement procedure carried out by the OFPRA in application of article L. 520-1 of the CESEDA, which led to their admission to France and subsidiary protection being granted, this procedure has no impact on OFPRA's competence to determine the protection status corresponding to the observed need for protection.

The court also recognized the refugee status of the two sons, who had been called to join the army of the regime, as well as to their parents, because of the political opinions attributed to them in consideration of the insubordination of their children.