A family of third country national, including young children, first applied for international protection in Italy. The Federal Office for Migration and Refugees (BAMF) rejected their subsequent application in Germany as inadmissible because it found Germany the Member State responsible to process the application. Upon appeal the regional administrative court allowed the action of the applicants but upon onward appeal by the BAMF, the Higher Administrative Court rejected the action and allowed appeals on points of law on grounds that, in certain aspects of its assessment of the general transfer-relevant situation of families seeking protection with minor children in Italy, it differed from the assessment of families eligible for protection by the Higher Administrative Court of Rhineland-Palatinate (pursuant to Section 78 (8) of the Asylum Act).

The Federal Administrative Court, suspended in its 1st Senate six ongoing proceedings under Section 78 (8) of the Asylum Act (revision of facts) regarding Dublin transfers to Italy pending a judgment on preliminary ruling by the CJEU in the case C-458/24 ("Daraa"), since the question was also relevant to the pending appeal proceedings.

The case C-458/24 (Daraa) concerns the legal consequences of a Member State's unwillingness to accept refugees – in this case, Italy – in proceedings under the Dublin III Regulation.