Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
European Union
Country of Decision : European Union
Court Name : EU: Court of Justice of the European Union [CJEU]
Date of decision : 05/07/2018
Type : Judgment
ECLI : ECLI:EU:C:2018:538
Case Number/Citation/ Document Symbol : Case C-213/17

X vs Secretary of State for Security and Justice (NL, Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie)

Operative part of the judgment

Article 23(3) of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person must be interpreted as meaning that the Member State in which a new application for international protection has been lodged is responsible for examining that application when no take back request has been made by that Member State within the periods laid down in Article 23(2) of that regulation, even though another Member State was responsible for examining applications for international protection lodged previously and the appeal brought against the rejection of one of those applications was pending before a court of that other Member State when those periods expired.

Article 18(2) of Regulation No 604/2013 must be interpreted as meaning that the making by a Member State of a take back request in respect of a third-country national who is staying on its territory without a residence document does not require that Member State to suspend its examination of an appeal brought against the rejection of an application for international protection lodged previously, and subsequently to terminate that examination in the event that the requested Member State agrees to that request.

Article 24(5) of Regulation No 604/2013 must be interpreted as meaning that, in a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings, a Member State making a take back request on the basis of Article 24 of that regulation, following the expiry, in the requested Member State, of the periods laid down in Article 23(2) thereof, is not required to inform the authorities of that requested Member State that an appeal brought against the rejection of an application for international protection lodged previously is pending before a court of the requesting Member State.

Article 17(1) and Article 24 of Regulation No 604/2013 must be interpreted as meaning that, in a situation such as that at issue in the main proceedings at the time the transfer decision was made, in which an applicant for international protection has been surrendered by one Member State to another Member State under a European arrest warrant and is staying on the territory of that second Member State without having lodged a new application for international protection there, that second Member State may request that first Member State to take back that applicant and is not required to decide to examine the application lodged by that applicant.

Dublin procedures; Second Instance determination;

Dublin Regulation III (Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for IP);

Individual Expert

European Union,EU: Court of Justice of the European Union [CJEU], X vs Secretary of State for Security and Justice (NL, Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie), 05/07/2018, ECLI:EU:C:2018:538
CJEU rules on implications of Dublin Regulation in case of European Arrest Warrant and appeals

https://caselaw.easo.europa.eu/pages/viewcaselaw.aspx?CaseLawID=418