General (scope, criteria, time limits)
Under Article 51 IPA, an application can be rejected as inadmissible only if:
- The applicant was granted international protection in another EU Member State, with the exception of persons accepted in the Republic of Slovenia based on quotas;
- The applicant comes from a First Country of Asylum;
- The applicant comes from a Safe Third Country;
- Another country is responsible for examining the applicant claim under the Dublin Regulation.
The time limits for making a decision on the admissibility are the same as in the regular procedure.
Besides from Dublin decisions, inadmissibility grounds are rarely applied in practice. In 2020, the applications were dismissed in 6 cases on the ground of protection in another Member State and in 451 cases on the ground that another country is responsible for examining the claim under the Dublin Regulation.
Decisions are normally issued faster than in-merit decisions. However, unwarranted delays due to no fault of the applicant may also occur in individual cases.
According to the IPA, the Migration directorate conducts the personal interview before making a decision in the admissibility procedure. The interview is conducted in the same way as described under Regular Procedure: Personal Interview.
Judicial review against a decision taken in the admissibility procedure can be lodged with the Administrative Court in eight days and does not have automatic suspensive effect, except if the application was rejected as inadmissible on “safe third country” grounds. If the application is rejected as inadmissible for other reasons, applicants can suspend enforcement until a final decision has been reached by adding a request to this effect to their application for judicial review.
In practice, the determining authority does not enforce the decision before the Administrative Court decides on the request for suspensive effect. As long as this practice remains, the situation is not much different in practical terms from an automatic suspensive effect being prescribed by law.
The law does not contain any special provisions regarding legal representation of asylum seekers during the admissibility procedure. The legal assistance in the admissibility procedure is provided in the same way as in the regular procedure. At first instance, legal representation can be provided by PIC while the applicants are appointed a refugee counsellor to represent them in the procedures before the Administrative Court.
 Official statistics provided by the Migration directorate, January 2021.
 Article 46(1) IPA.
 Article 70(3) IPA, citing Article 51, third indent IPA.
 Article 32(2) Administrative Dispute Act.