This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 62021CA0019
Case C-19/21: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 1 August 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Den Haag zittingsplaats Haarlem — Netherlands) — I, S v Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 — Criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection — Article 8(2) and Article 27(1) — Unaccompanied minor with a relative legally present in another Member State — Refusal by that Member State of that minor’s take charge request — Right to an effective remedy of that minor or of that relative against the refusal decision — Articles 7, 24 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Best interests of the child)
Case C-19/21: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 1 August 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Den Haag zittingsplaats Haarlem — Netherlands) — I, S v Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 — Criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection — Article 8(2) and Article 27(1) — Unaccompanied minor with a relative legally present in another Member State — Refusal by that Member State of that minor’s take charge request — Right to an effective remedy of that minor or of that relative against the refusal decision — Articles 7, 24 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Best interests of the child)
Case C-19/21: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 1 August 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Den Haag zittingsplaats Haarlem — Netherlands) — I, S v Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 — Criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection — Article 8(2) and Article 27(1) — Unaccompanied minor with a relative legally present in another Member State — Refusal by that Member State of that minor’s take charge request — Right to an effective remedy of that minor or of that relative against the refusal decision — Articles 7, 24 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Best interests of the child)
OJ C 408, 24.10.2022, pp. 15–15
(BG, ES, CS, DA, DE, ET, EL, EN, FR, GA, HR, IT, LV, LT, HU, MT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SK, SL, FI, SV)
|
24.10.2022 |
EN |
Official Journal of the European Union |
C 408/15 |
Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 1 August 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Rechtbank Den Haag zittingsplaats Haarlem — Netherlands) — I, S v Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid
(Case C-19/21) (1)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 - Criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection - Article 8(2) and Article 27(1) - Unaccompanied minor with a relative legally present in another Member State - Refusal by that Member State of that minor’s take charge request - Right to an effective remedy of that minor or of that relative against the refusal decision - Articles 7, 24 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Best interests of the child)
(2022/C 408/16)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Rechtbank Den Haag zittingsplaats Haarlem
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicants: I, S
Defendant: Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid
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 conjunction with Articles 7, 24 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
must be interpreted as meaning that:
it requires a Member State to which a take charge request has been made, based on Article 8(2) of that regulation, to grant a right to a judicial remedy against its refusal decision to the unaccompanied minor, within the meaning of Article 2(j) of that regulation, who applies for international protection, but not to the relative of that minor, within the meaning of Article 2(h) of that regulation.