Official Journal of the European Union

C series

—

C/2025/1072

(Case C-742/24, Havvitt

(C/2025/1072)

Language of the case: English

Referring court

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: International Protection Appeals Tribunal, Minister for Justice, Ireland, Attorney General

Defendant: L.K.

Questions referred

1.In K.S., the CJEU noted that Directive 2013/33/EU gives no guidance in relation to what acts may constitute a delay attributable to the applicant for international protection within the meaning of Article 15(1) of the Directive. In considering what acts may constitute a delay attributable to an applicant, is it appropriate to have regard to the fact that an applicant such as the respondent in this case provided no information at all (by way of response to the questionnaire) for more than the nine month period provided for under Article 15 of the Directive?

2.Does the concept of delay for the purposes of Article 15(1) of Directive 2013/33/EU encompass only a delay that may be attributed wholly and exclusively to the applicant for international protection, or does it encompass any not insignificant delay that may be attributed to the applicant or that may be considered to constitute ‘non-cooperation’ by the applicant?

3.In circumstances where there is significant unexplained delay on the part of an applicant for international protection, and there has also been delay on the part of the State itself, together with delay due to external factors such as those arising from Covid-19, can part of the overall delay be ‘attributed to the applicant’ for the purposes of Directive 2013/33/EU, or must any delay in processing the application be exclusively that of the applicant?

4.Does the inclusion of the phrase, ‘attributed in part’ in Regulation 11(4)(b) of the European Communities (Reception Conditions) Regulations 2018, S.I. No. 230/2018 mean that Ireland has failed to properly transpose Directive 2013/33/EU, given the margin of appreciation that member states enjoy in how they choose to implement the Directive and in circumstances where it does not appear that the inclusion of this phrase renders impossible in practice or excessively difficult the exercise of rights conferred by the EU legal order?

The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any of the parties to the proceedings.

EU:C:2021:11

OJ 2013, L 180, p. 96.

ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1072/oj

ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)

—