CJEU: Request for preliminary ruling from the Court of Baden Wurtemburg

Date: 
Wednesday, March 15, 2017

The Court of Baden Wurtemburg has referred preliminary questions to the CJEU on 15 March 2017, concerning, inter alia, the criteria to define when a person “absconded” for the purposes of extending the time limit after which a Member State shall be relieved of its responsibility under the Dublin Regulation.

The following questions are submitted to the CJEU for a preliminary ruling:

1. Is an asylum seeker only absconding within the meaning of Article 29 (2) 2 of the Regulation (EU) No 604/2013, when he deliberately and willingly withdraws himself from the scrutiny of national authorities in order to frustrate or complicate his transfer, or does it suffice if over a longer period of time he does not live in his allocated house and the authorities are not informed about his whereabouts and are unable to plan his transfer? Can the person concerned rely on the correct use of the provision and object to the decision of transfer, since the transfer did not take place within the six months’ time limit, claiming he was not absconding?

2. Is an extension of the time limit pursuant to Article 29 (1) 1 of the Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 only possible, when the transferring Member State informs the Member State in charge of taking the person back before the expiry date of the period, which may not exceed 18 months, and before the transfer is carried out, that the person concerned is absconding, or is an extension of the time limit only possible when the Member States concerned mutually agree to extend the time limit?

3. Is the transfer of a beneficiary of international protection to the Member State in charge (in which his status was recognised) inadmissible in view of the serious and life threatening circumstances he might be exposed to upon return? And would such transfer be in violation of Article 4 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union? Does this question fall under the scope of the European Union law? Which provisions of the European Union law should be relied upon when assessing the living conditions of a beneficiary of international protection?

The ELENA Weekly Legal Update would like to thank Ana Maria Bucataru for this translation.


This item was reproduced with the permission of ECRE from the weekly ELENA legal update supported by the Fundamental Rights and Citizenship Funding Programme and distributed by email. The purpose of these updates is to inform asylum lawyers and legal organizations supporting asylum seekers and refugees of recent developments in the field of asylum law. Please note that the information provided is taken from publicly available information on the internet. Every reasonable effort is made to make the content accurate and up to date at the time each item is published but no responsibility for its accuracy and correctness, or for any consequences of relying on it, is assumed by ECRE, the IRC or its partners.

                                                     

 

Keywords: 
Dublin Transfer
Inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
Internal protection