Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Uniformity of refugee status in EU law and secondary movements: insights from QY v Germany and A., v Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Hamm

Stoyanova, Vladislava LU (2025) In European Papers
Abstract
In QY v Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Effect of a decision granting refugee status) the Court of Justice held that Member State are not required under EU to automatically recognize the positive decision issued by another Member State. Such a positive decision does have some significance, but very far from being anything close to automatically binding as to the positive conclusion that the applicant is eligible for refugee status. In this article, after briefly describing the facts, I explain the Court’s arguments in QY and their justifications. I also make relevant comparative references to the new EU asylum regulations adopted in 2024 (i.e. the 2024 Qualification Regulation and the 2024 Procedures Regulation). More specifically, Section 2... (More)
In QY v Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Effect of a decision granting refugee status) the Court of Justice held that Member State are not required under EU to automatically recognize the positive decision issued by another Member State. Such a positive decision does have some significance, but very far from being anything close to automatically binding as to the positive conclusion that the applicant is eligible for refugee status. In this article, after briefly describing the facts, I explain the Court’s arguments in QY and their justifications. I also make relevant comparative references to the new EU asylum regulations adopted in 2024 (i.e. the 2024 Qualification Regulation and the 2024 Procedures Regulation). More specifically, Section 2 explains that there is no uniform refugee status in the EU. Section 3 clarifies that in QY the Court reasoned in favour of procedural obligation upon Member States to take ‘full account’ of positive decisions made by other Member States. Finally, Section 4 explores the link between, on the one hand, the effects of positive decisions for Member States and, on the other, the content of the refugee status. To proceed with this exploration, A., v Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Hamm delivered on the same day as QY is taken into account. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Public international law, Human rights, Folkrätt, Mäskliga rättigheter
in
European Papers
publisher
European Paper
ISSN
2499-8249
project
The Borders Within: the Multifaceted Legal Landscape of Migrant Integration in Europe
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
5ed75b78-e52b-4d43-bd30-6e19de08fb6d
date added to LUP
2025-03-27 11:46:31
date last changed
2025-04-04 15:01:11
@article{5ed75b78-e52b-4d43-bd30-6e19de08fb6d,
  abstract     = {{In QY v Bundesrepublik Deutschland (Effect of a decision granting refugee status) the Court of Justice held that Member State are not required under EU to automatically recognize the positive decision issued by another Member State.  Such a positive decision does have some significance, but very far from being anything close to automatically binding as to the positive conclusion that the applicant is eligible for refugee status. In this article, after briefly describing the facts, I explain the Court’s arguments in QY and their justifications. I also make relevant comparative references to the new EU asylum regulations adopted in 2024 (i.e. the 2024 Qualification Regulation and the 2024 Procedures Regulation).  More specifically, Section 2 explains that there is no uniform refugee status in the EU. Section 3 clarifies that in QY the Court reasoned in favour of procedural obligation upon Member States to take ‘full account’ of positive decisions made by other Member States. Finally, Section 4 explores the link between, on the one hand, the effects of positive decisions for Member States and, on the other, the content of the refugee status. To proceed with this exploration, A., v Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Hamm delivered on the same day as QY is taken into account.}},
  author       = {{Stoyanova, Vladislava}},
  issn         = {{2499-8249}},
  keywords     = {{Public international law; Human rights; Folkrätt; Mäskliga rättigheter}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  publisher    = {{European Paper}},
  series       = {{European Papers}},
  title        = {{Uniformity of refugee status in EU law and secondary movements: insights from QY v Germany and A., v Generalstaatsanwaltschaft Hamm}},
  url          = {{https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/files/212456136/QY_Note_V_Stoyanova_FINAL_published_in_LUCRIS.docx}},
  year         = {{2025}},
}