The case was registered before the CJEU under C-392/22

The Court of the Hague referred a case for preliminary ruling before the CJEU on the question of the divisibility of the principle of interstate mutual trust in a case concerning a Dublin transfer to Poland.  The Court submitted questions to the Court for the third time on the relationship between systematic pushbacks, standard detention, the CEAS and interstate trust after similar questions were submitted by the court in cases concerning Dublin transfer to Malta and Dublin transfer to Croatia. Those cases were revoked because the contested decisions in those proceedings were revoked and withdrawn after referral. The first case was referred to the CJEU on 4 October 2021 and withdrawn on 2 March 2022 and the second case was adopted on 18 March 2022 as referral for preliminary ruling and withdrawn from the list of the Court by order of 20 May 2022.

The referring court asked the following questions:

I In the light of recitals 3, 32 and 39 in the preamble and read in conjunction with Articles 1, 4, 18, 19 and 47 of the EU Charter, is the Dublin Regulation to be interpreted and applied that the interstate principle of trust is not divisible, thus that serious and systematic violations of EU law committed by the possibly responsible Member State before transfer with regard to third-country nationals who are not (yet) Dublin returnees absolutely preclude transfer to this Member State?

II If the answer to the previous question is in the negative, Article 3(2) of the Dublin Regulation, read in conjunction with Articles 1, 4, 18, 19 and 47 of the EU Charter, must be interpreted as meaning that if the potentially responsible Member State seriously and systematically infringes the EU law, the transferring Member State cannot base itself on the principle of interstate confidence in the context of the Dublin Regulation, but must remove any doubts or must demonstrate that after transfer the applicant is not in a situation that is contrary to Article 4 of the EU Charter?

III What means of evidence can the applicant use to substantiate his arguments that Article 3(2) of the Dublin Regulation precludes his transfer and what standard of proof should be used in this regard? In view of the references to the EU acquis in the preamble to the Dublin Regulation, does the transferring Member State have a cooperation and/or verification obligation, or should individual guarantees be issued in the case of serious and systematic violations of fundamental rights vis-à-vis third-country nationals? obtained from the responsible Member State that the applicant's fundamental rights are (are) respected after transfer? Is the answer to this question different if the applicant is in need of evidence if he cannot substantiate his consistent and detailed statements with documents,

IV Is the answer to the previous questions under III different if the applicant demonstrates that complaining to the authorities and/or recourse to legal remedies in the responsible Member State will not be possible and/or effective?