Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Esc Del
Reset
CJEU - C-578/16 PPU, C.K. and others
Country of applicant: Egypt, Syria
Keywords: Individual assessment, Medical Reports/Medico-legal Reports, Reception conditions, Request that charge be taken, Dublin Transfer, Accommodation centre, Health (right to), Vulnerable person

Even where there are no substantial grounds for believing that there are systemic flaws in the Member State responsible, a Dublin transfer can only be carried out in conditions which exclude the possibility that that transfer might result in a real and proven risk of the person concerned suffering inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 4 CFR EU.

If there is a real and proven risk that the state of health of an applicant who suffers from a serious mental or physical illness would significantly and permanently deteriorate, that transfer would constitute a violation of Article 4 CFR EU.

It is for the courts and authorities of the requesting Member State to eliminate any serious doubts concerning the impact of the transfer on the health of the person concerned by taking all necessary precaution. If the taking of precautions is not sufficient, it is for the authorities of the Member State concerned to suspend the execution of the transfer for as long as the applicant’s conditions render him unfit for transfer.

Member States may choose to conduct its own examination of that person’s application by making use of the “discretionary clause” laid down in Article 17(1) DRIII, but is not required to do so.

Date of decision: 16-02-2017
Relevant International and European Legislation: Art 33,Article 1,Article 4,Article 19,Article 51,Article 52,Article 17,Article 18,Article 19,Article 3,Recital (4),Recital (5),Recital (9),Recital (32),Recital (34),Article 3,Article 12,Article 17,Article 27,Article 29,Article 31,Article 32,Article 267 § 2,Article 267 § 1 (b),Article 78
Germany – Federal Administrative Court, 27 April 2016, 1 C 24.15
Country of applicant: Iran
Keywords: Assessment of facts and circumstances, Effective remedy (right to), Protection, Inadmissible application, Responsibility for examining application, Dublin Transfer, Request to take back

If a Member State is responsible for carrying out an asylum procedure under the relevant terms of the Dublin Regulation, e.g. under Art. 29 (2) of the Dublin III Regulation, an applicant may invoke that Member State’s responsibility if it has not been positively established that another Member State (which does not have responsibility) is willing to take charge of the applicant or take him or her back.

In such a case, it can be derived from the objective and purpose of the Dublin system, as well as the fact that it constitutes the procedural dimension of the substantive rights granted to applicants by Directive 2011/95/EU (i.e. Qualification Directive), that the individual concerned is entitled to have his asylum application reviewed by the responsible Member State. This is so, irrespective of the question, whether the provisions on the Member State’s responsibility generally provide for subjective rights of the applicants. 

Date of decision: 27-04-2016
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,Article 4,EN - Dublin III Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No. 604/2013 of 26 June 2013 (recast Dublin II Regulation),Recital (4),Recital (5),Article 3,Article 29,Article 42