Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
08/02/2024
The CJEU interpreted the concept of ‘new elements or findings’ for a subsequent application and ruled that its judgments, which significantly add to the likelihood of an asylum seeker qualifying as a beneficiary of refugee status or subsidiary protection, can constitute a new element justifying a fresh examination of the substance of the asylum application.

ECLI
ECLI:EU:C:2024:122
Input Provided By
EUAA IDS
Type
Judgment
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
European Union, Court of Justice of the European Union [CJEU], A.A. v Federal Republic of Germany, C-216/22, ECLI:EU:C:2024:122, 08 February 2024. 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=4053
Case history
Other information
Abstract

According to the press release of the CJEU:


"A Syrian national who left his country in 2012 and feared being recalled to serve in the armed forces or arrested if he refused to fulfil his military obligations there was granted, in 2017, subsidiary protection in Germany. However, he was refused refugee status. In the wake of a judgment of the Court of Justice concerning the situation of Syrian conscientious objectors, he lodged a further asylum application (a ‘subsequent application’). He argued that that judgment constituted a change in the legal position in his favour. That subsequent application, however, was rejected as inadmissible, that is to say without examining whether the conditions required to qualify for refugee status were met. The individual concerned challenged that refusal before a German court.


That court asked the Court, inter alia, whether it is compatible with EU law to consider that, in principle, only an amendment to the applicable provisions, and not a judicial decision, can constitute a new element justifying, where appropriate, a full examination of the subsequent application.


The Court answers that, in principle, any judgment of the Court can constitute a new element justifying a full re-examination if the conditions required to qualify for refugee status are met. That applies also for a judgment which is limited to interpreting a provision of EU law already in force at the time that a decision on a previous application was adopted. The date on which the judgment was delivered is irrelevant. However, in order for a judgment of the Court to constitute a full re-examination, it must significantly add to the likelihood of the applicant qualifying as a beneficiary of refugee status. As regards the remainder of the procedure in the event that a national court or tribunal annuls a decision rejecting a subsequent application as inadmissible, the Court further states that Member States may, without being obliged to do so, authorise their courts or tribunals to rule themselves on that application and, where appropriate, grant refugee status."


Country of Decision
European Union
Court Name
EU: Court of Justice of the European Union [CJEU]
Case Number
C-216/22
Date of Decision
08/02/2024
Country of Origin
Syria
Keywords
Subsequent Application
Other Source/Information
Court of Justice of the EU Press release