Registered before the CJEU under case no C-551/23

The judgment concerned appeals submitted by three third country nationals (from different countries) against negative decision from the State Secretary. The applicants are beneficiaries of international protection in Greece. The State Secretary did not want to reject the application as inadmissible and to apply Article 33 of the recast APD since the Netherlands assumes that some persons from third countries who enjoy international protection in Greece cannot return to that Member State as the living conditions in Greece would expose them to a serious risk of inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 4 of the EU Charter and this was considered applicable also for these three applicants.

The Council of State suspended the proceedings and referred questions to the CJEU for preliminary ruling:

Question 1: In a case where a Member State is not allowed to make use of the possibility provided for in Article 33(2)(a) of Directive 2013/32/EU to reject an application for international protection as inadmissible because the applicant was granted refugee status in another Member State where living conditions in that Member State would expose the applicant to a serious risk of inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 4 of the EU Charter, must Article 3(1), second sentence, of Regulation No 604/2013, Article 4(1), second sentence, and Article 13 of Directive 2011/95/EU as well as Article 10(2) and (3), Article 33(1) and (2),(a) of Directive 2013/32/EU be interpreted as meaning that the fact that refugee status has already been granted prevents the Member State from examining the application for international protection submitted to it without the outcome having already been determined in advance and obliges it to grant refugee status to the applicant without examining the substantive conditions for this protection?

Question 2: If not, should the examining Member State consider and treat the applicant for international protection - who cannot return to the Member State that granted him refugee status - as a first-time applicant for international protection? And must the examining Member State take into account in any way the status granted by the other Member State when assessing this request? And if so, how?

Question 3: In a case where an applicant for international protection has already been recognized as a refugee by another Member State, must Article 4(1) and (2) of Directive 2011/95/EU be interpreted as meaning that the examining Member State, if the applicant has concrete grounds for the application, must request documents or further information from the Member State granting status in order to investigate on the basis of which facts and/or documents that Member State has recognised the applicant as a refugee?

Question 4: Should the status granted by the first Member State be taken over by another Member State (see question 1), and it is subsequently established that an applicant for international protection does not or no longer meets the conditions stated in the chapters II and III of Directive 2011/95/EU, then Articles 11 and 14 of that directive are to be interpreted as meaning that this other Member State may also revoke, terminate or not renew the status granted by the first Member State?