- 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-233/19: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 30 September 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour du travail de Liège — Belgium) — B. v Centre public d’action sociale de Liège (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Directive 2008/115/EC — Return of illegally staying third-country nationals — Third-country national suffering from a serious illness — Return decision — Judicial remedy — Automatic suspensory effect — Conditions — Grant of social assistance — Articles 19 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62019CA0233
62019CA0233
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 399/13
(Case C-233/19)
(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Directive 2008/115/EC - Return of illegally staying third-country nationals - Third-country national suffering from a serious illness - Return decision - Judicial remedy - Automatic suspensory effect - Conditions - Grant of social assistance - Articles 19 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union)
(2020/C 399/17)
Language of the case: French
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: B.
Defendant: Centre public d’action sociale de Liège
Operative part of the judgment
Articles 5 and 13 of Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals, read in the light of Article 19(2) and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as meaning that a national court, hearing a dispute on social assistance, the outcome of which is linked to the possible suspension of the effects of a return decision taken in respect of a third-country national suffering from a serious illness, must hold that an action for annulment and suspension of that decision leads to automatic suspension of that decision, even though suspension of that decision does not result from the application of national legislation, where:
that action contains arguments seeking to establish that the enforcement of that decision would expose that third-country national to a serious risk of grave and irreversible deterioration in his or her state of health, which does not appear to be manifestly unfounded, and that
that legislation does not provide for any other remedy, governed by precise, clear and foreseeable rules, which automatically entail the suspension of such a decision.
(1)
OJ C 164, 13.5.2019.