Luxembourg - Administrative Tribunal, 38753, 13 January 2017

Country of Decision:
Country of Applicant:
Date of Decision:
13-01-2017
Citation:
38753
Court Name:
Administrative Tribunal, Fourth Chamber
Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly version
Headnote: 

Wishing to challenge his transfer to Germany from Luxembourg, the applicant appealed this decision and the court found that, on the basis of CJEU jurisprudence, all individuals had a right to contest the manner in which the Dublin III criteria are applied. 

Facts: 

The applicant applied for asylum on 20 September 2016 having breached a law concerning the fight against drug use of 30 July 2016. The hearing took place the same day.

The authorities discovered through EURODAC that the applicant had already applied for asylum in different countries, including Germany, who accepted to take responsibility of his application by letter on 07 November 2016.

The transfer was suspended because the applicant was in administrative detention at the time.

The applicant thus appealed the transfer decision.

 

Decision & Reasoning: 

Concerning the determining criteria for identifying the responsible State, the administrative tribunal founded its reasoning on the Ghezelbash case. In this case, the CJEU found that an individual that has applied for asylum has a right to appeal a decision made by that State in order to contest the manner in which the Dublin III criteria have been applied by the responsible State. 

Outcome: 

The administrative tribunal concluded that the appeal was unfounded as the cessation clause on which the applicant relied upon did not apply to the case: the applicant had not left the territory of the Member States for longer than three months as provided for in Art. 19(2) of the Dublin III Regulation. As such, the court upheld the transfer decision.

 

Observations/Comments: 

There are no new elements in the court’s reasoning. However, it is interesting how the court relied on CJEU jurisprudence to make asylum applicants’ right to appeal apparent.

As such, despite a relative silence on the part of national administrative jurisdictions regarding EU case-law, this decision shows the weight of CJEU case-law in an appeal. 

The original version of this summary was written by Passerell a.s.b.l. and a translation completed by Jessica Pradille.