Accept Refuse

EUR-Lex Access to European Union law

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 62017CN0175

Case C-175/17: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 6 April 2017 — X, other party: Belastingdienst/Toeslagen

OJ C 178, 6.6.2017, p. 13–13 (BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)

6.6.2017   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 178/13


Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 6 April 2017 — X, other party: Belastingdienst/Toeslagen

(Case C-175/17)

(2017/C 178/15)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Raad van State

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: X

Defendant: Belastingdienst/Toeslagen

Questions referred

1.

Must Article 13 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 (OJ 2008 L 348, p. 98; ‘the Return Directive’), read in conjunction with Articles 4, 18, 19(2) and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, be interpreted as meaning that under EU law, if national law makes provision to that effect, in proceedings challenging a decision which includes a return decision within the meaning of Article 3(4) of Directive 2008/115/EC, the legal remedy of an appeal has automatic suspensory effect where the third-country national claims that enforcement of the return decision would result in a serious risk of infringement of the principle of non-refoulement? In other words, in such a case, should the expulsion of the third-country national concerned be suspended during the period for lodging an appeal, or, if an appeal has been lodged, until a decision has been delivered on that appeal, without the third-country national concerned being required to submit a separate request to that effect?

2.

Must Article 39 of Council Directive 2005/85/EC of 1 December 2005 on minimum standards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status (OJ 2005 L 326, p. 13; ‘the Procedures Directive’), read in conjunction with Articles 4, 18, 19(2) and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, be interpreted as meaning that, under EU law, if national law makes provision to that effect, in proceedings relating to the rejection of an application for asylum within the meaning of Article 2 of Directive 2005/85/EC, the legal remedy of an appeal has automatic suspensory effect? In other words, in such a case, should the expulsion of the asylum-seeker concerned be suspended during the period for lodging an appeal, or, if an appeal has been lodged, until a decision has been delivered on that appeal, without the asylum-seeker concerned being required to submit a separate request to that effect?


Top