The case concerned an applicant from Afghanistan about whom the SEM noticed that he submitted an application in Greece in December 2019, and has been questioned twice in Croatia in 2020. The SEM decided not to process the application because the authorities in Croatia have accepted the take back request. By decision of 7 September 2021, the SEM adopted the decision to transfer the applicant to Croatia. On the medical situation of the applicant, the SEM noted that she suffers of PTSD. The applicant appealed against the decision on the Dublin transfer and requested the suspensive effect of the transfer.

The applicant alleged that she would be exposed to pushbacks and ill-treatment in case of transfer to Croatia, with regards to the reception conditions. The Federal Administrative Court (FAC) noted that during the initial Dublin interview, the authorities noted the vulnerability of the applicant and that she requested to be interviewed by a female officer, which was later provided.

Based on previous jurisprudence and information concerning Croatia, the FAC concluded there are no systemic deficiencies in the asylum and reception system in Croatia, thus there are no impediments to the transfer. The FAC stated that the allegations of the applicant on previous ill-treatment from the police officers and refusal of access to the asylum procedure are not supported by evidence and the general situation in Croatia as presented by the applicant was not sufficient to support those allegations.

On the medical situation, the FAC noted that the SEM mentioned that Croatia disposes of all medical structures necessary to offer medical treatment and that the ability of the applicant to travel will be checked prior to the actual transfer. Based on recent medical reports and examinations presented by the applicant, the FAC noted that there is a serious deterioration of her health situation since she needed extended medical treatment, including four hospitalisations and a high risk of suicide for the applicant. However, the FAC mentioned that these circumstances do not reach the threshold of the Article 3 ECHR to render the transfer illegal. However, the FAC stated that SEM has insufficiently determined the facts with regards to the medical situation of the applicant and to her ability to travel. The FAC noted that there should be additional precautionary measures taken by SEM, also in cooperation with the Croatian authorities to assess the possibility to implement the transfer.

For these reasons, the FAC annulled the contested decision and ordered SEM to establish all relevant facts to assess the feasibility of the transfer in view of the medical situation of the applicant.