Case summaries

  • My search
  • Relevant International and European Legislation
    1
Reset
CJEU - C-225/16, Ouhrami
Country of applicant: Algeria
Keywords: Return

The CJEU ruled that the period of application of an entry ban under the Return Directive begins to run from the date on which the person concerned has actually left the territory of the Member States.

Date of decision: 26-07-2017
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Returns Directive, Directive 2008/115/EC of 16 December 2008,Recital (2),Recital (4),Recital (6),Recital (10),Recital (11),Recital (14),Article 1,Article 3,Article 6,Article 8,Article 11,Article 12,Article 20
CJEU - Case C‑47/15, Sélina Affum v Préfet du Pas-de-Calais, Procureur général de la cour d’appel de Douai
Country of applicant: Ghana
Keywords: Detention, Return
Imprisonment of a Third Country National on account of illegal entry to a Member State across an internal border of the Schengen area is not permitted under the Return Directive where said individual has not yet been subject to a return procedure.
 
This  applies equally to a Third Country National who is merely in transit on the territory of the Member State, is intercepted when leaving the Schengen area and is the subject of a procedure for readmission into the Member State from which he or she has come.
 
Date of decision: 07-06-2016
Relevant International and European Legislation: European Union Law,EN - Returns Directive, Directive 2008/115/EC of 16 December 2008,Recital (2),Recital (4),Recital (5),Recital (10),Recital (17),Recital (26),Article 1,Article 2,Article 3,Article 4,Article 6,Article 7,Article 8,Article 9,Article 11,Article 14,Article 15,Article 16,Article 17
The Netherlands – Supreme Court, 29 March 2016, 14/00826

The Supreme Court has requested two preliminary rulings to the Court of Justice of the European Union. The time of onset and the determination of the duration of the suspect’s ‘undesirable declaration’, which is considered equal to an entry ban, are under discussion since this statement had already been issued before the Return Directive was operational.

Date of decision: 29-03-2016
Relevant International and European Legislation: European Union Law,EN - Returns Directive, Directive 2008/115/EC of 16 December 2008,Recital (2),Recital (4),Recital (6),Recital (8),Recital (10),Recital (11),Recital (14),Recital (24),Article 3,Article 7,Article 11
CJEU - C‑554/13 Z. Zh. and O. V Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie
Country of applicant: China

This case related to two third country nationals who were ordered to leave the Netherlands, without being granted a period for voluntary departure, on the basis that they constituted a risk to public policy.

The CJEU gave guidance on the meaning of Article 7(4) of the Returns Directive, stating that the concept of a ‘risk to public policy’ should be interpreted strictly with an individualised assessment of the personal conduct of the person. Suspicion or conviction for a criminal offence was a relevant consideration. However, it was unnecessary to conduct a new assessment solely relating to the period for voluntary departure where the person had already been found to constitute a risk to public policy. 

Date of decision: 11-06-2015
Relevant International and European Legislation: EN - Family Reunification Directive, Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003,Article 6,EN - Returns Directive, Directive 2008/115/EC of 16 December 2008,Recital (2),Recital (6),Recital (10),Recital (11),Recital (24),Article 1,Article 2,Article 3,Article 4,Article 5,Article 6,Article 7,Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 2010/C 83/01