Type: Judgment

Authority: European Authorities: Euopean Union' Court of Justice

Date: 01/25/2018

Subject: According to the Court, Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 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, read in the light of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as not precluding a provision of national law which provides that the factual situation that is relevant for the review by a court or tribunal of a transfer decision is that obtaining at the time of the last hearing before the court or tribunal determining the matter or, where there is no hearing, at the time when that court or tribunal gives a decision on the matter. The Court affirmed that, in a situation in which a third-country national who, after having made an application for international protection in a first Member State (Member State ‘A’), was transferred to Member State ‘A’ as a result of the rejection of a fresh application lodged in a second Member State (Member State ‘B’) and has then returned, without a residence document, to Member State ‘B’, a take back procedure may be undertaken in respect of that third-country national and it is not possible to transfer that person anew to Member State ‘A’ without such a procedure being followed. In a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings, in which a third-country national has returned, without a residence document, to the territory of a Member State that has previously transferred him to another Member State, a take back request must be submitted within the periods prescribed in that provision and those periods may not begin to run until the requesting Member State has become aware that the person concerned has returned to its territory. Where a take back request is not made within the periods laid down in that regulation, the Member State on whose territory the person concerned is staying without a residence document is responsible for examining the new application for international protection which that person must be permitted to lodge. The fact that an appeal procedure brought against a decision that rejected a first application for international protection made in a Member State is still pending is not to be regarded as equivalent to the lodging of a new application for international protection in that Member State. Finally, where the take back request is not made within the periods laid down and the person concerned has not made use of the opportunity that he must be given to lodge a new application for international protection, the Member State on whose territory that person is staying without a residence document can still make a take back request, and that provision does not allow the person to be transferred to another Member State without such a request being made

Parties: Hasan

Classification: Freedoms - Art. 18 Right to asylum - Refugees - Justice - Art. 47 Justice: remedy

Text