Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62019CA0194

    Case C-194/19: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 15 April 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État — Belgium) — H. A. v État belge (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 — Determination of the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection — Article 27 — Remedy — Whether account should be taken of circumstances subsequent to the transfer decision — Effective judicial protection)

    OJ C 217, 7.6.2021, p. 3–4 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

    7.6.2021   

    EN

    Official Journal of the European Union

    C 217/3


    Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 15 April 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État — Belgium) — H. A. v État belge

    (Case C-194/19) (1)

    (Reference for a preliminary ruling - Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 - Determination of the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection - Article 27 - Remedy - Whether account should be taken of circumstances subsequent to the transfer decision - Effective judicial protection)

    (2021/C 217/04)

    Language of the case: French

    Referring court

    Conseil d’État

    Parties to the main proceedings

    Applicant: H. A.

    Defendant: État belge

    Operative part of the judgment

    Article 27(1) 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, read in the light of recital 19 thereof, and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which provides that the court or tribunal seised of an action for annulment of a transfer decision may not, in the context of the examination of that action, take account of circumstances subsequent to the adoption of that decision which are decisive for the correct application of that regulation, unless that legislation provides for a specific remedy entailing an ex nunc examination of the situation of the person concerned, the results of which are binding on the competent authorities, a remedy which may be exercised after such circumstances have arisen and which, in particular, is not made conditional on the deprivation of that person’s liberty or on the fact that implementation of that decision is imminent.


    (1)  OJ C 164, 13.5.2019.


    Top