UM 5998-14

On April 30, 2014, A applied for residence and work permits in Sweden and invoked asylum reasons. During the asylum investigation, he replied to a question from the Swedish Migration Board that he accepted the public assistant appointed by the Swedish Migration Board. A stated during the investigation that he was staying in Hungary with a valid visa but that he traveled from Hungary to Lebanon on December 24, 2013 and then did not stay on the territory of the Member States until April 29, 2014 when he arrived in Sweden.

On June 19, 2014, the Migration Board decided to reject A's application for a residence and work permit and to transfer him to Hungary. As a reason for the decision, the Migration Board stated essentially that, in accordance with the provisions of the Dublin Regulation, the State responsible was to examine A's application for asylum in the light of the fact that he had been granted a visa in Hungary and that the Hungarian authorities had agreed to transfer it to. The applicant decided then appeal the decision. 

UM 3055 -14:

On 2 January 2014, B applied for residence and work permits. Since the Migration Board informed him that, in accordance with the rules of the Dublin Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the criteria and mechanisms for determining which Member State is responsible for examining an application for international protection), the As a third-country national or a stateless person has filed in any Member State [recast], intended to request that Germany take over the examination of his application, B stated that he wished Sweden to consider the application because his intention had always been to seek asylum in Sweden. He also stated inter alia that there are racist organizations in Germany. On 10 March 2014, the Migration Board decided to reject his application and to transfer him to Germany according to the Dublin Regulation. The applicant decided then appeal the decision. 

The provision on public assistance in Chapter 18. Section 1 of the Aliens Act can be applied to the Migration Board in cases where the issue of transfer under the Dublin Regulation has been updated. However, the work should as a rule be able to assume that the need for counseling is missing. Even in the case of a migration court in an appealed case of transfer under the Dublin Regulation, the provision can be applied. However, it may be assumed that the need for assistance is lacking if the appeal is deemed to have no reasonable prospect of success.