Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
28/10/2022
DE: The Administrative Court of Minden referred questions before the CJEU on the interpretation of Article 33(2) of the recast Asylum Procedures Directive.

ECLI
Input Provided By
EUAA Information and Analysis Sector (IAS)
Other Source/Information
Type
Referral for a preliminary ruling
Original Documents
Relevant Legislative Provisions
Recast Asylum Procedures Directive (Directive 2013/32/EU on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection) (recast APD) and/or APD 2005/85/CE
Reference
Germany, Regional Administrative Court [Verwaltungsgericht], M.E.O. v Federal Republic of Germany, 28 October 2022. 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=3514
Case history
Other information
Abstract

The case was registered before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) under C-202/23


The following questions are referred to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling:


1. Is Article 33(2)(d) of the recast APD in conjunction with Article 2(q) thereof to be interpreted as precluding a provision of a Member State under which an application for international protection made in that Member State is to be rejected as inadmissible if the applicant previously made an application for international protection in another Member State and the procedure was discontinued by the other Member State because the applicant abandoned the application in that Member State?


2. If Question 1 is to be answered in the negative: Is Article 33(2)(d) of the recast APD in conjunction with Article 2(q) thereof to be interpreted as precluding a provision of a Member State under which an application for international protection made in that Member State is to be rejected as inadmissible if the applicant previously made an application for international protection in another Member State and the procedure was discontinued by the other Member State because the applicant abandoned the application in the other Member State, even though the asylum procedure in the other Member State can still be reopened by the other Member State if the applicant makes an application to that effect in the other Member State?


3. If Question 2 is to be answered in the affirmative: Does EU law stipulate what is the relevant date, in connection with the decision on an application for international protection, for determining whether an asylum procedure previously discontinued in another Member State can still be reopened or is this a matter governed solely by national law?


4. If Question 3 is to be answered to the effect that EU law does contain such stipulations: What is the relevant date under EU law, in connection with the decision on an application for international protection, for determining whether an asylum procedure previously discontinued in another Member State can still be reopened?
Country of Decision
Germany
Court Name
DE: Regional Administrative Court [Verwaltungsgericht]
Case Number
Date of Decision
28/10/2022
Country of Origin
Lebanon
Keywords
Withdrawal/End/Revocation/Renewal of Protection
Secondary movements