- 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-217/22: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale ordinario di Bologna (Italy) lodged on 24 March 2022 — OV v Ministero Interno — Unità Dublino
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62022CN0217
62022CN0217
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
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 222/21
(Case C-217/22)
(2022/C 222/31)
Language of the case: Italian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: OV
Defendant: Ministero Interno — Unità Dublino
Question referred
1.Must Articles 4 and 5 of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013, (1) particularly in view of the right to an effective remedy laid down in Article 27 of that regulation, be interpreted as meaning that the applicant, who has challenged before the courts of the requesting State the transfer decision adopted by the Dublin Unit of that State in the context of a take back procedure under Article 18(1)(b), is entitled to invoke the infringement by the requested State of the duty to provide information laid down in Article 4 or of the obligation to arrange a personal interview with the applicant under Article 5 of that regulation, and if the answer is in the affirmative, what is the relevance of such an infringement?
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 (OJ 2013 L 180, p. 31).