In an era marked by distinct migration flows and shifting geopolitical landscapes, the European Union faces increasing pressure to establish a fair and cohesive asylum system. This paper delves into the complexities of EU asylum law, namely the transition from the Dublin III Regulation to the Asylum and Migration Management Regulation. Both legal acts determine which Member State is responsible for examining an application for international protection. The overarching question is in what way both regulations differ and what their similarities are. Through a meticulous comparative analysis, this thesis examines the key provisions of the legal acts and critically assesses the strengths and weaknesses of each norm. Drawing on CJEU case law, this paper also considers the application of asylum law in practice. By shedding light on the origins of some key principles within the context of international refugee law and the EU’s legislative history, it showcases the evolution of the concept of solidarity and the country-of-first-entry-principle. Additionally, past challenges of an equitable attribution of responsibility among the Member States are addressed and the legal standing of refugees is analysed, keeping in mind both advancements and potential setbacks.