This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62021CO0505
Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 16 December 2021.
FU v Agence fédérale pour l'Accueil des demandeurs d'asile (Fedasil).
Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Asylum policy – Criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection – Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 (Dublin III) – Article 27 – Remedies against a transfer decision – No link between the interpretation of EU law that is sought and the actual facts of the main action or its purpose – Manifest inadmissibility.
Case C-505/21.
Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 16 December 2021.
FU v Agence fédérale pour l'Accueil des demandeurs d'asile (Fedasil).
Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Asylum policy – Criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection – Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 (Dublin III) – Article 27 – Remedies against a transfer decision – No link between the interpretation of EU law that is sought and the actual facts of the main action or its purpose – Manifest inadmissibility.
Case C-505/21.
Court reports – general – 'Information on unpublished decisions' section
ECLI identifier: ECLI:EU:C:2021:1049
Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 16 December 2021 – Fedasil
(Case C‑505/21) ( 1 )
(Reference for a preliminary ruling – Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice – Asylum policy – Criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection – Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 (Dublin III) – Article 27 – Remedies against a transfer decision – No link between the interpretation of EU law that is sought and the actual facts of the main action or its purpose – Manifest inadmissibility)
Questions referred for a preliminary ruling – Jurisdiction of the Court – Limits – Clearly irrelevant questions and hypothetical questions put in a context not permitting a useful answer – Assignment of an applicant for international protection to a specialised reception facility as a measure preparatory to the procedure for implementing a transfer decision – No link between the interpretation of EU law that is sought and the actual facts of the main action or its purpose – Manifest inadmissibility
(Art. 267 TFEU; European Parliament and Council Regulation No 604/2013, Art. 27)
(see paras 38-43, 48, 49, operative part)
Operative part
The request for a preliminary ruling made by the tribunal du travail de Liège, division d’Arlon (Labour Court, Liège, Arlon Division, Belgium), by decision of 17 August 2021, is manifestly inadmissible.
( 1 ) OJ C 412, 11.10.2021.