This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62020CA0368
Joined Cases C-368/20 and C-369/20: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 April 2022 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark — Austria) — NW v Landespolizeidirektion Steiermark (C-368/20), Bezirkshauptmannschaft Leibnitz (C-369/20) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Free movement of persons — Regulation (EU) 2016/399 — Schengen Borders Code — Article 25(4) — Temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders for a maximum total duration of six months — National legislation providing for a number of successive periods of border control resulting in that duration being exceeded — Non-compliance of such legislation with Article 25(4) of the Schengen Borders Code where the successive periods are based on the same threat or threats — National legislation requiring, on pain of a penalty, a passport or identity card to be presented when the internal border control is carried out — Non-compliance of such an obligation with Article 25(4) of the Schengen Borders Code when the border control itself is contrary to that provision)
Joined Cases C-368/20 and C-369/20: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 April 2022 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark — Austria) — NW v Landespolizeidirektion Steiermark (C-368/20), Bezirkshauptmannschaft Leibnitz (C-369/20) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Free movement of persons — Regulation (EU) 2016/399 — Schengen Borders Code — Article 25(4) — Temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders for a maximum total duration of six months — National legislation providing for a number of successive periods of border control resulting in that duration being exceeded — Non-compliance of such legislation with Article 25(4) of the Schengen Borders Code where the successive periods are based on the same threat or threats — National legislation requiring, on pain of a penalty, a passport or identity card to be presented when the internal border control is carried out — Non-compliance of such an obligation with Article 25(4) of the Schengen Borders Code when the border control itself is contrary to that provision)
Joined Cases C-368/20 and C-369/20: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 April 2022 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark — Austria) — NW v Landespolizeidirektion Steiermark (C-368/20), Bezirkshauptmannschaft Leibnitz (C-369/20) (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Free movement of persons — Regulation (EU) 2016/399 — Schengen Borders Code — Article 25(4) — Temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders for a maximum total duration of six months — National legislation providing for a number of successive periods of border control resulting in that duration being exceeded — Non-compliance of such legislation with Article 25(4) of the Schengen Borders Code where the successive periods are based on the same threat or threats — National legislation requiring, on pain of a penalty, a passport or identity card to be presented when the internal border control is carried out — Non-compliance of such an obligation with Article 25(4) of the Schengen Borders Code when the border control itself is contrary to that provision)
OJ C 237, 20.6.2022, p. 7–7
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
20.6.2022 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 237/7 |
Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 April 2022 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark — Austria) — NW v Landespolizeidirektion Steiermark (C-368/20), Bezirkshauptmannschaft Leibnitz (C-369/20)
(Joined Cases C-368/20 and C-369/20) (1)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Free movement of persons - Regulation (EU) 2016/399 - Schengen Borders Code - Article 25(4) - Temporary reintroduction of border control at internal borders for a maximum total duration of six months - National legislation providing for a number of successive periods of border control resulting in that duration being exceeded - Non-compliance of such legislation with Article 25(4) of the Schengen Borders Code where the successive periods are based on the same threat or threats - National legislation requiring, on pain of a penalty, a passport or identity card to be presented when the internal border control is carried out - Non-compliance of such an obligation with Article 25(4) of the Schengen Borders Code when the border control itself is contrary to that provision)
(2022/C 237/08)
Language of the case: German
Referring court
Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: NW
Defendants: Landespolizeidirektion Steiermark (C-368/20), Bezirkshauptmannschaft Leibnitz (C-369/20)
Operative part of the judgment
|
1. |
Article 25(4) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code), as amended by Regulation (EU) 2016/1624 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 September 2016, must be interpreted as precluding border control at internal borders from being temporarily reintroduced by a Member State on the basis of Articles 25 and 27 of that code where the duration of its reintroduction exceeds the maximum total duration of six months, set in Article 25(4), and no new threat exists that would justify applying afresh the periods provided for in Article 25. |
|
2. |
Article 25(4) of Regulation 2016/399, as amended by Regulation 2016/1624, must be interpreted as precluding national legislation by which a Member State obliges a person, on pain of a penalty, to present a passport or identity card on entering the territory of that Member State via an internal border, when the reintroduction of the internal border control in relation to which that obligation is imposed is contrary to that provision. |