Netherlands, France, Sweden and the United Kingdom are among the Member States which have also followed the same practice rejecting cases on this ground. According to GCR’s knowledge, the German authorities continue to implement this judgment. NGOs noted that during 2022, Swedish authorities also rejected cases on this ground. In general, an extension is requested if a DNA procedure is pending and not expected to be completed within the two-week timeframe. This request is accepted by almost all the Member States, apart from Germany, which might reject a re-examination request on the basis that the results proving the family link were not submitted in due time. Regarding unanswered re-examination requests, the Greek Dublin Unit tries to address reminders to seek an official reply. Unanswered cases are eventually referred to the regular procedure. Re-examination requests for several cases addressed to the German Dublin Unit remained unanswered for a long period of time which exceeded the two-week time frame mentioned in the CJEU judgment and they were eventually replied to following reminders by the Greek authorities. Re-examination requests addressed to the French authorities remained unanswered for months, or even for years. Based on GCR’s knowledge, there was no response to re-examination requests made in 2017, despite the efforts made by both the Greek authorities and NGO’s. These cases are eventually examined on an ad hoc basis. According to NGOs, during 2022 France and Sweden failed to reply to several re-examination requests within the time limit.336 2.1.1. Application of the Dublin criteria To the knowledge of the GCR, most outgoing requests of previous years took place in the context of family reunification i.e. application of the family unity criteria. For a“take charge” request to be addressed to the Member State where a family member or a relative resides, the written consent of the family member is required, as well as documents proving the legal status in the receiving country (e.g. residence permit, asylum seeker’s card or other documents certifying the submission of an asylum application) and documentation relating to evidence of the family link (e.g. certificate of marriage, civil status, passport, ID). For cases of unaccompanied minors, the written consent of the guardian is required. Based on GCR’s experience, an outgoing request will not be sent until the written consent of the relative and the documents proving the legal status in the other Member State has been submitted to the Greek Dublin Unit. On the contrary, non-existence of documents proving the family relationship between the applicant and the family member or relative to the requested Member State is not a sufficient reason for the request not to be sent and/or received. In such cases, the availability of circumstantial evidence is assessed (e.g. photographs of the applicant and the sponsor, statement of the sponsor describing her/his relationship with the applicant, transcript of the sponsor’s interview before the authorities of the requested Member State, in which the details of the applicant are mentioned). These cases, though, have little chances to be accepted according to the Greek Dublin Unit. Family unity is the main way for applicants to enter another Member State safely and legally. However, restrictive practices of requested states such as requirements for official translations of documents proving family links, sometimes unnecessary DNA tests to prove the applicant’s family ties, age assessments of unaccompanied children to be conducted according to the requested state’s methods, often result to the rejection of the ‘take charge’ requests. Apart from the general criteria applied to every case falling under the Dublin III Regulation, nuances have been observed on the way the family unity criteria are applied by different Member States. Germany, for 336 Information by: The HOME Project (available at: https://bit.ly/420Utwa) and European Expression (available at: https://bit.ly/42ZtKkX) 73