Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
06/08/2021
DE: The Regional Administrative Court referred questions on inadmissibility and subsequent applications when the unsuccessful procedure was conducted in another Member State

ECLI
Input Provided By
EUAA IDS
Type
Referral for a preliminary ruling
Original Documents
Relevant Legislative Provisions
Revised Asylum Procedures Directive (Directive 2013/32/EU on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection) and/or APD 2005/85/CE
Reference
Germany, Regional Administrative Court [Verwaltungsgericht], SI, TL, ND, VH, YT, HN v Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Federal Republic of Germany), 06 August 2021. Link redirects to the English summary in the EUAA Case Law Database.
Permanent link to the case
https://caselaw.euaa.europa.eu/pages/viewcaselaw.aspx?CaseLawID=2188
Case history
Other information
Abstract

The case is registered before the CJEU under C-497/21


The applicants, Georgian nationals, are seeking international protection status from the defendant after having already unsuccessfully requested protection under asylum law in Denmark and have further submitted asylum applications in Germany on 10 November 2020.


The following questions are referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union for a preliminary ruling pursuant to Article 267 TFEU:


1. Is national legislation under which an application for international protection can be rejected as an inadmissible subsequent application compatible with Article 33(2)(d) and Article 2(q) of Directive 2013/32/EU if the unsuccessful initial asylum procedure was conducted in a different EU Member State?


2. If the answer to Question 1 is in the affirmative: Is national legislation under which an application for international protection can be rejected as an inadmissible subsequent application compatible with Article 33(2)(d) and Article 2(q) of Directive 2013/32/EU even if the unsuccessful initial asylum procedure was conducted in Denmark?


If the answer to Question 2 is in the negative: Is national legislation under which an application for asylum is inadmissible in the event of a subsequent application and which makes no distinction in that respect between refugee status and subsidiary protection status compatible with Article 33(2)[(d)] of Directive 2013/32/EU?


Country of Decision
Germany
Court Name
DE: Regional Administrative Court [Verwaltungsgericht]
Case Number
Date of Decision
06/08/2021
Country of Origin
Georgia
Keywords
Subsequent Application
Source
CURIA
Other Source/Information
CURIA