- 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-161/15: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 17 March 2016 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État — Belgium) — Abdelhafid Bensada Benallal v État belge (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Directive 2004/38/EC — Decision withdrawing residence authorisation — Principle of respect for the rights of the defence — Right to be heard — Procedural autonomy of the Member States — Admissibility of grounds of appeal on a point of law — Plea based on public policy)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62015CA0161
62015CA0161
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
C 156/18
(Case C-161/15)(1)
((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2004/38/EC - Decision withdrawing residence authorisation - Principle of respect for the rights of the defence - Right to be heard - Procedural autonomy of the Member States - Admissibility of grounds of appeal on a point of law - Plea based on public policy))
(2016/C 156/25)
Language of the case: French
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Abdelhafid Bensada Benallal
Defendant: État belge
Operative part of the judgment
EU law must be interpreted as meaning that where, in accordance with the applicable national law, a plea alleging infringement of national law raised for the first time before the national court hearing an appeal on a point of law is admissible only if that plea is based on public policy, a plea alleging infringement of the right to be heard, as guaranteed by EU law, raised for the first time before that same court, must be held to be admissible if that right, as guaranteed by national law, satisfies the conditions required by national law for it to be classified as a plea based on public policy, this being a matter for the referring court to determine.
(1)
OJ C 190, 8.6.2015.