Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
European Union
Country of Decision : European Union
Court Name : EU: Court of Justice of the European Union [CJEU]
Date of decision : 10/12/2020
Type : Judgment
ECLI : ECLI:EU:C:2020:1010
Case Number/Citation/ Document Symbol : C‑616/19

M.S., M.W., G.S. v Minister for Justice and Equality [Ireland]

The CJEU ruled that Article 25 of the Qualification Directive does not preclude legislation to consider an application inadmissible where the applicant benefits from subsidiary protection in another Member State

The case concerned the interpretation of Article 25 of the Qualification Directive. 

By decisions of 1 December 2017, 2 February 2018 and 29 June 2018, the applicants' requests for international protection were rejected as they benefited from subsidiary protection in another Member State, namely in Italy. They appealed these decisions before the International Protection Appeals Tribunal in Ireland. By decisions of 23 May, 28 September and 18 October 2018, the appeals were dismissed. The applicants brought further actions before the High Court of Ireland to annul these decisions. The High Court observed that Article 33(2)(a) of the Asylum Procedures Directive allows a Member State to reject as inadmissible an application for asylum where the applicant has been granted international protection by another Member State, whether refugee status or subsidiary protection. However, under Article 25(2)(a) of the Qualification Directive, this possibility is limited to situations where the applicant had been granted refugee status in another Member State.

Given the fact that Ireland is bound by the Dublin III Regulation and the Qualification Directive, but did not take part in the adoption and application of the Asylum Procedures Directive, the High Court asked the CJEU whether in such a case Article 25 of the Qualification Directive "must be interpreted as meaning that it precludes legislation of that Member State under which an application for international protection is considered to be inadmissible where the applicant has already been granted subsidiary protection."

The Court concluded that Article 25(2) of the Qualification Directive "must be interpreted as not precluding legislation of a Member State which is subject to Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person, but which is not bound by Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection, in accordance with which an application for international protection is considered to be inadmissible where the applicant benefits from subsidiary protection status in another Member State.”

Assessment of Application; Asylum Procedures/Special Procedures; Subsidiary Protection;

Dublin Regulation III (Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for IP); Revised Asylum Procedures Directive (Directive 2013/32/EU on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection) and/or APD 2005/85/CE;

EASO IDS

European Union, Court of Justice of the European Union [CJEU], M.S., M.W., G.S. v Minister for Justice and Equality [Ireland], C‑616/19, ECLI:EU:C:2020:1010, 10 December 2020. Link redirects to the English summary in the EASO Case Law Database.

https://caselaw.easo.europa.eu/pages/viewcaselaw.aspx?CaseLawID=1429