Case C-528/11: Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 30 May 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Sofia-grad — Bulgaria) — Zuheyr Frayeh Halaf v Darzhavna agentsia za bezhantsite pri Ministerskia savet (Asylum — Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 — Determination of the Member State responsible for examining an application for asylum lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national — Article 3(2) — Discretion of the Member States — Role of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees — Obligation of Member States to request that Office to present its views — None)
Date: 2013-05-30
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: Bulgaria, UNHCR, foreign national, infringement of EU law, interpretation of the law, right of asylum








C_2013225EN.01001202.xml










3.8.2013   


EN


Official Journal of the European Union


C 225/12





Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 30 May 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad Sofia-grad — Bulgaria) — Zuheyr Frayeh Halaf v Darzhavna agentsia za bezhantsite pri Ministerskia savet
(Case C-528/11) (1)

(Asylum - Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 - Determination of the Member State responsible for examining an application for asylum lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national - Article 3(2) - Discretion of the Member States - Role of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees - Obligation of Member States to request that Office to present its views - None)
2013/C 225/19
Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Administrativen sad Sofia-grad

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicant: Zuheyr Frayeh Halaf

Defendant: Darzhavna agentsia za bezhantsite pri Ministerskia savet

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Administrativen sad Sofia-grad — Interpretation of Article 3(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national (OJ 2003 L 50, p. 1) — Asylum application previously made in another Member State — Obligation of the requested Member State to take responsibility for examining an asylum application, on the basis of the ‘sovereignty’ clause of Article 3(2) of that regulation, where the asylum legislation and practices of the Member State responsible do not comply with international rules on human rights and Article 18 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Legislation of the requested Member State not providing either criteria or rules of procedure for the application of the sovereignty clause — Admissible evidence of non-compliance with European Union law on asylum where there is no judgment of the Court of Justice declaring that by reason of those infringements the Member State responsible has failed to fulfil its obligations in relation to asylum

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 3(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 343/2003 of 18 February 2003 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an asylum application lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national must be interpreted as permitting a Member State, which is not indicated as responsible by the criteria in Chapter III of that regulation, to examine an application for asylum even though no circumstances exist which establish the applicability of the humanitarian clause in Article 15 of that regulation. That possibility is not conditional on the Member State responsible under those criteria having failed to respond to a request to take back the asylum seeker concerned.










2.


The Member State in which the asylum seeker is present is not obliged, during the process of determining the Member State responsible, to request the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to present its views where it is apparent from the documents of that Office that the Member State indicated as responsible by the criteria in Chapter III of Regulation No 343/2003 is in breach of the rules of European Union law on asylum.






(1)  OJ C 370, 17.12.2011.