Case summaries
Austria – Supreme Administrative Court, 31 March 2016, Ra 2015/20/0231
Country of applicant:
Iran
Keywords:
Effective remedy (right to), Right to remain pending a decision (Suspensive effect), Inadmissible application, Responsibility for examining application, Dublin Transfer, Request to take back
The Supreme Administrative Court (SAC) submitted the following two questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) for a preliminary ruling according to Article 267 TFEU:
Are the provisions of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person 1 that confer the right to an effective remedy against a transfer decision, in particular Article 27(1), to be interpreted as meaning that an applicant for asylum is entitled to claim that responsibility has been transferred to the requesting Member State on the ground that the six month transfer period has expired (Article 29(2) in conjunction with Article 29(1) of Regulation No 604/2013 in light of the 19th recital)?
If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative:
Does the transfer of responsibility under the first sentence of Article 29(2) of Regulation No 604/2013 occur by the fact of the expiry of the transfer period without any order or, for responsibility to be transferred because the period has expired, is it also necessary that the obligation to take charge of, or to take back, the person concerned has been refused by the responsible Member State?
Date of decision:
31-03-2016
Relevant International and European Legislation:
European Union Law,EN - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,Article 4,EN - Dublin II Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003,Article 10,Article 17,EN - Dublin III Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No. 604/2013 of 26 June 2013 (recast Dublin II Regulation),Recital (19),Article 13,Article 17,Article 18,Article 22,Article 25,Article 27,Article 29,Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 2010/C 83/01,Article 267 § 2,Article 267 § 1 (b)
Czech Republic - Prague Regional Court, 1 July 2015, A. K. A., S. K. K., A. E. and K. B. v Ministry of the Interior, 49Az 56/2015-41
Country of applicant:
Iraq
The Prague Regional court quashed a Dublin transfer decision in respect of a family of four Yazidi adults to Bulgaria. Firstly, the court held that the Ministry of Interior had paid insufficient consideration to whether the Bulgarian asylum system ensures adequate health care for one of the Applicants, suffering from a psychological disorder. Secondly, the court found that the Applicants were not subject to personal interviews in the proceedings concerning their Dublin transfer, thus violating their right to a fair trial.
Date of decision:
01-06-2015
Relevant International and European Legislation:
EN - Dublin III Regulation, Council Regulation (EC) No. 604/2013 of 26 June 2013 (recast Dublin II Regulation),Recital (19),Article 3,Article 5