EUR-Lex Access to European Union law
This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62009CN0357
Case C-357/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen Sad Sofia-grad, Bulgaria lodged on 7 September 2009 — Saïd Shamilovich Kadzoev v Direktsia Migratsia pri Ministerstvo na vatreshnite raboti
Case C-357/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen Sad Sofia-grad, Bulgaria lodged on 7 September 2009 — Saïd Shamilovich Kadzoev v Direktsia Migratsia pri Ministerstvo na vatreshnite raboti
Case C-357/09: Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen Sad Sofia-grad, Bulgaria lodged on 7 September 2009 — Saïd Shamilovich Kadzoev v Direktsia Migratsia pri Ministerstvo na vatreshnite raboti
OJ C 267, 7.11.2009, p. 46–48
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
7.11.2009 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 267/46 |
Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen Sad Sofia-grad, Bulgaria lodged on 7 September 2009 — Saïd Shamilovich Kadzoev v Direktsia ‘Migratsia’ pri Ministerstvo na vatreshnite raboti
(Case C-357/09)
2009/C 267/79
Language of the case: Bulgarian
Referring court
Administrativen Sad Sofia-grad
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Shamilovich Kadzoev
Defendant: Direktsia ‘Migratsia’ pri Ministerstvo na vatreshnite raboti Saïd
Questions referred
1. |
Must Article 15(5) and (6) of Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals be interpreted as meaning that
|
2. |
Must Article 15 (5) and (6) of Directive 2008/115/EC […] be interpreted as meaning that within the periods laid down for detention in a specialised facility with a view to removal within the meaning of that Directive no account is to be taken of the period during which implementation of a removal decision from the Member State was suspended under an express provision on the ground that an appeal against that decision is pending, even though during the period of that procedure the third-country national has continued to stay in that specialised detention facility, where he did not have valid identity documents and there is therefore some doubt as to his identity or where he does not have any means of supporting himself or where he has demonstrated aggressive conduct? |
3. |
Must Article 15 (4) of Directive 2008/115/EC […] be interpreted as meaning that removal is not reasonably possible where:
|
4. |
Must Article 15(4) and (6) of Directive 2008/115/EC be interpreted as meaning that if at the time when the detention with a view to removal of the person concerned to a third country is reviewed there is found to be no reasonable ground for removing him and the grounds for extending his detention have been exhausted, in such a case:
|