The case concerned an third country national who has previously submitted an application in Denmark. The proceedings in Denmark were unsuccessful and, since Denmark is not bound neither by Qualification nor by the Asylum Procedures, the Higher Administrative Court stated that the application made in Germany cannot be rejected as inadmissible in the light also of the CJEU judgement in the case L.R. vs Bundesrepublik Deutschland, C-8/20, 20 May 2021.

The Higher Administrative Court reiterated that an application for international protection can be considered inadmissible subsequent application within the meaning of Article 33(d) of the recast Asylum Procedures Directive when the previous decision was taken by a Member State bound by both the Qualifications and Procedures Directives, being therefore a full member of the CEAS. The Court reiterated that for the Article 33 (d) of the recast APD to be applicable, a decision should have been taken in the first asylum procedure as to whether the applicant should be granted refugee status or subsidiary protection status in accordance with the Qualifications Directive and where the applicant benefited in the first Member State of the same procedural guarantees and the same substantive standards.