This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62021CA0231
Case C-231/21: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 31 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria) — IA v Bundesamt für Fremdenwesen und Asyl (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Dublin system — Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 — Article 29(2) — Transfer of the asylum seeker to the Member State responsible for examining the application for international protection — Six-month time limit for transfer — Possibility of extending that time limit up to a maximum of one year in the event of imprisonment — Definition of ‘imprisonment’ — Court-authorised non-voluntary committal of the asylum seeker to a hospital psychiatric department)
Case C-231/21: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 31 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria) — IA v Bundesamt für Fremdenwesen und Asyl (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Dublin system — Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 — Article 29(2) — Transfer of the asylum seeker to the Member State responsible for examining the application for international protection — Six-month time limit for transfer — Possibility of extending that time limit up to a maximum of one year in the event of imprisonment — Definition of ‘imprisonment’ — Court-authorised non-voluntary committal of the asylum seeker to a hospital psychiatric department)
Case C-231/21: Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 31 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria) — IA v Bundesamt für Fremdenwesen und Asyl (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Dublin system — Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 — Article 29(2) — Transfer of the asylum seeker to the Member State responsible for examining the application for international protection — Six-month time limit for transfer — Possibility of extending that time limit up to a maximum of one year in the event of imprisonment — Definition of ‘imprisonment’ — Court-authorised non-voluntary committal of the asylum seeker to a hospital psychiatric department)
OJ C 207, 23.5.2022, p. 6–7
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
- Date of document:
- 31/03/2022
- Date lodged:
- 12/04/2021
- Author:
- Court of Justice
- Form:
- Judicial information
- Authentic language:
- German
- Type of procedure:
- Reference for a preliminary ruling
- Link
- Select all documents mentioning this document
- Case affecting:
-
- Related EU case-law document 62021CJ0231
- Instruments cited in case law:
- Link
- EUROVOC descriptor:
|
23.5.2022 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 207/6 |
Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 31 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Verwaltungsgerichtshof — Austria) — IA v Bundesamt für Fremdenwesen und Asyl
(Case C-231/21) (1)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Dublin system - Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 - Article 29(2) - Transfer of the asylum seeker to the Member State responsible for examining the application for international protection - Six-month time limit for transfer - Possibility of extending that time limit up to a maximum of one year in the event of imprisonment - Definition of ‘imprisonment’ - Court-authorised non-voluntary committal of the asylum seeker to a hospital psychiatric department)
(2022/C 207/08)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Verwaltungsgerichtshof
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: IA
Defendant: Bundesamt für Fremdenwesen und Asyl
Operative part of the judgment
The second sentence of Article 29(2) 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 concept of ‘imprisonment’ referred to in that provision is not applicable to the non-voluntary committal of an asylum seeker to a hospital psychiatric department, which has been authorised by a judicial decision, on the ground that that person, due to a mental illness, is a serious danger to him- or herself or to society.
