- 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-158/23, Keren: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 15 March 2023 — T.G. v Minister van Sociale Zaken en Werkgelegenheid
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62023CN0158
62023CN0158
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
Official Journal of the European Union
(Case C-158/23, Keren (*) )
(2023/C 235/13)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: T.G.
Defendant: Minister van Sociale Zaken en Werkgelegenheid
Questions referred
1.Must Article 34 of the Qualification Directive (*) be interpreted as precluding a national rule such as that laid down in Article 7b of the Wet inburgering (Law on civic integration), pursuant to which holders of asylum status are placed under the obligation, on pain of a fine, to pass a civic integration examination?
2.Must Article 34 of the Qualification Directive be interpreted as precluding a national rule based on the premiss that holders of asylum status themselves bear the full costs of integration programmes?
3.In answering the second question, is it significant that holders of asylum status can receive a government loan to cover the costs of integration programmes and that that loan is waived if they pass their civic integration examination on time or are exempted from or released from the civic integration obligation in good time?
4.If it is permissible, under Article 34 of the Qualification Directive, that holders of asylum status are obliged, on pain of a fine, to pass a civic integration examination, and that holders of asylum status bear the full costs of integration programmes, does the amount of the loan to be repaid, whether or not together with the fine, then undermine the achievement of the purpose and useful effect of Article 34 of the Qualification Directive?
(*) The name of the present case is fictitious and does not correspond to the actual name of any party to the proceedings.
(*) 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 (OJ 2011 L 337, p. 9).