The case is an appeal procedure against the Administrative court’s judgement U I 1628/2020-126, which concerned a Cameroonian national (A.A.) who was extradited from Slovenia to Croatia without an individual treatment. The Supreme Court emphasised that genuine possibilities to apply for asylum do not exist if an individual is not provided with all the information relevant to his (i.e. personal, concrete) legal situation. It further noted that when interpreting Article 4 and Article 19(2) of the Charter, the case-law of the ECtHR (particularly with regards to Article 3) must also be considered.

The Court further stated that the principle of non-refoulement must also be respected in the context of the implementation of measures between Member States and that Member States may not carry out a transfer to another Member State if it is not possible for them no to be aware of systemic deficiencies in that Member State. It was also noted that the State is obliged to consider and assess the risks that might jeopardise the respect of the values guaranteed by Article 3 of the ECHR and that the State’s responsibility exists irrespective of whether the person was in fact subsequently exposed to treatment contrary to Article 3 ECHR in the other State. It found the appeal filed by the Republic of Slovenia unjustified.