Journal

The Case of the Administrative Arrangement between Greece and Germany: A tale of “paraDublin activity”?

Date: 
Monday, November 5, 2018

In mid-August 2018 Germany, Greece and Spain agreed on the sketchy details of the initial migration compromise deal that was reached on the sidelines of the EU Summit in Brussels late June 2018. In this context, the Ministers on Migration of Germany and Greece reaffirmed their commitment by exchange of letters, to work towards common European solutions and to avoid any unilateral measure with respect to migration and...

'Second time’s a charm’ – the CJEU’s interpretation of the irregular border crossing criterion in the Dublin Regulation in A.S. and Jafari

Date: 
Tuesday, February 13, 2018

Introduction

On 26 July 2017, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) decided on the request for a preliminary ruling by a Slovenian (C-490/16) and an Austrian Court (C-646/16) and held that the responsibility criteria under the Dublin III Regulation (EU/604/2013) also applied during the so-called “migration crisis” of 2015/2016. According to the Grand...

The ZAT case and the far-reaching consequences for the Dublin Regulation

Date: 
Thursday, February 9, 2017

1.  Introduction

The ZAT case was a judicial review before the UK Upper Tribunal. The outcome of the first instance judicial review suggested that the operation of the Dublin Regulation was inadequate to provide the necessary protection the applicants needed...

Allocating responsibility for an asylum application through Convention rights: The potential impact of ZAT & Others

Date: 
Thursday, March 3, 2016

This journal entry should be read in conjunction with the EDAL case summary available here, where a summary of the facts is also available.

Introduction:

The presence of migrant and refugee camps in northern France, on the edge of the Schengen zone and just 21 miles away from the UK has long been symbolic of the practical failings of the CEAS and in particular...

The Dublin System and the Right to an Effective Remedy – Observations on the preliminary references in the cases of C-155/15 – George Karim v Migrationsverket and C- 63/15 - Mehrdad Ghezelbash v Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie

Date: 
Tuesday, September 1, 2015

Introduction

The present article presents some observations on two similar cases pending before the CJEU. It offers some prospective thinking on the opportunity to expand the interpretation of the right to an effective remedy under the Dublin III Regulation (DRIII) - and to go beyond the Abdullahi ruling - as the evolution of the protection landscape after the adoption of the Dublin III Regulation increases procedural safeguards and rights for asylum seekers falling under its scope.  The note also explores the intrinsic links between the right to an effective remedy and...

Tarakhel v. Switzerland: Where does the Dublin system stand now?

Date: 
Thursday, December 4, 2014

This article is to be read in conjunction with the EDAL case summary

Introduction

On the 4th November the Grand Chamber provided its much anticipated judgment in Tarakhel v. Switzerland (no. 29217/12). The Court’s judgment, concerning the proposed return of a family to Italy under the Dublin Regulation, had been awaited with bated breath given a divide between domestic and European jurisprudence on whether return to Italy...

The Dublin system and the Right to an Effective Remedy– The case of C-394/12 Abdullahi

Date: 
Friday, December 13, 2013

This article is to be read in conjunction with the EDAL case summary.

Introduction

On 10 December 2013 the Grand Chamber of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued a preliminary reference ruling in case C-394/12 Abdullahi concerning the scope of Dublin appeals in situations where a Member State has agreed to take charge of an applicant for asylum under Art. 10(1)...