The case is registered before the CJEU under C-458/24, Daraa

In a case concerning a Dublin transfer to Italy, the Regional Administrative Court of Sigmarinen questioned whether the refusal of a member state to accept Dublin applicants represents a systemic breach that may not be covered by the factual requirements in Article 3(2)(2) of the Dublin III Regulation.

The Regional Administrative Court of Sigmaringen referred the following questions before the CJEU for a preliminary ruling the interpretation of Article 3(2)(2) of the Dublin III Regulation and the question of whether the norm, as an unwritten factual criterion, requires the willingness of the requested Member State to accept Dublin applicants:

1. Is Article 3(2) of the Dublin III Regulation as such to be interpreted as meaning that the Member State examining responsibility must continue its examination of the criteria provided for in Chapter III and itself becomes responsible even if the Member State responsible according to those criteria is not prepared to accept Dublin returnees?

2. Does this obligation of the Member State examining responsibility to continue its examination of the criteria provided for in Chapter III also apply if there are no systemic weaknesses within the meaning of Article 3(2)(2) of the Dublin III Regulation in the Member State not prepared to accept the applicant, which entail a risk of inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 4 of the EU Charter?

3. Is Article 33(1) of the Asylum Procedures Directive to be interpreted as precluding a national provision under which an asylum application is to be rejected as inadmissible even if the Member State responsible under the Dublin III Regulation is not prepared to accept the applicant?

4. Must the Member State examining responsibility assume that the Member State responsible under the Dublin III Regulation is not prepared to accept the applicant if the Ministry of the Interior of the Member State responsible declares in writing that no Dublin applicants will be accepted for the time being and if the Member State responsible subsequently prevents the acceptance of Dublin applicants?

5. Does the refusal of the responsible Member State to accept Dublin returnees in itself and independently of any resulting danger within the meaning of Article 4 of the EU Charter violate the subjective rights of the person concerned? Does Article 27(1) of the Dublin III Regulation also provide an effective legal remedy for this violation of subjective rights?