- Query in any language with multilingual search
- Access EUR-Lex and EU Commission case law
- See relevant paragraphs highlighted instantly
Similar Documents
Explore similar documents to your case.We Found Similar Cases for You
Case C-556/17: Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 29 July 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Pécsi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság — Hungary) — Alekszij Torubarov v Bevándorlási és Menekültügyi Hivatal (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Common policy on asylum and subsidiary protection — Common procedures for granting international protection — Directive 2013/32/EU — Article 46(3) — Full and ex nunc examination — Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Right to an effective remedy — Extent of the powers of the first-instance court or tribunal — No power to vary — Refusal by the competent administrative or quasi-judicial body to comply with a decision of that court or tribunal)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62017CA0556
62017CA0556
With us you find everything. Try it now!
I imagine what I want to write in my case, I write it in the search engine and I get exactly what I wanted. Thank you!
Valentina R., lawyer
23.9.2019
Official Journal of the European Union
C 319/8
(Case C-556/17) (<span class="super note-tag">1</span>)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common policy on asylum and subsidiary protection - Common procedures for granting international protection - Directive 2013/32/EU - Article 46(3) - Full and ex nunc examination - Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Right to an effective remedy - Extent of the powers of the first-instance court or tribunal - No power to vary - Refusal by the competent administrative or quasi-judicial body to comply with a decision of that court or tribunal)
(2019/C 319/07)
Language of the case: Hungarian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Alekszij Torubarov
Defendant: Bevándorlási és Menekültügyi Hivatal
Operative part of the judgment
Article 46(3) of Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection, read in conjunction with Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as meaning that, in circumstances, such as those at issue in the main proceedings, where a first-instance court or tribunal has found — after making a full and ex nunc examination of all the relevant elements of fact and law submitted by an applicant for international protection — that, under the criteria laid down by Directive 2011/95/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 December 2011 on standards for the qualification of third-country nationals or stateless persons as beneficiaries of international protection, for a uniform status for refugees or for persons eligible for subsidiary protection and for the content of the protection granted, that applicant must be granted such protection on the ground that he or she relied on in support of his or her application, but after which the administrative or quasi-judicial body adopts a contrary decision without establishing that new elements have arisen that justify a new assessment of the international protection needs of the applicant, that court or tribunal must vary that decision which does not comply with its previous judgment and substitute its own decision for it as to the application for international protection, disapplying as necessary the national law that would prohibit it from proceeding in that way.
Language of the case: Hungarian.
* * *
(<span class="super">1</span>) OJ C 5, 8.1.2018.
ECLI:EU:C:2019:140