- 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-369/17: Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 13 September 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Fővárosi Közigazgatási és Munkaügyi Bíróság — Hungary) — Shajin Ahmed v Bevándorlási és Menekültügyi Hivatal (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Area of freedom, security and justice — Borders, asylum and immigration — Refugee status or subsidiary protection status — Directive 2011/95/EU — Article 17 — Exclusion from subsidiary protection status — Grounds — Conviction for a serious crime — Determination of seriousness on the basis of the penalty provided for under national law — Whether permissible — Need for an individual assessment)
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62017CA0369
62017CA0369
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
12.11.2018
Official Journal of the European Union
C 408/25
(Case C-369/17) (*)
((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Borders, asylum and immigration - Refugee status or subsidiary protection status - Directive 2011/95/EU - Article 17 - Exclusion from subsidiary protection status - Grounds - Conviction for a serious crime - Determination of seriousness on the basis of the penalty provided for under national law - Whether permissible - Need for an individual assessment))
(2018/C 408/32)
Language of the case: Hungarian
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: Shajin Ahmed
Defendant: Bevándorlási és Menekültügyi Hivatal
Operative part of the judgment
Article 17(1)(b) of 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, must be interpreted as precluding legislation of a Member State pursuant to which the applicant for subsidiary protection is deemed to have ‘committed a serious crime’ within the meaning of that provision, which may exclude him from that protection, on the basis of the sole criterion of the penalty provided for a specific crime under the law of that Member State. It is for the authority or competent national court ruling on the application for subsidiary protection to assess the seriousness of the crime at issue, by carrying out a full investigation into all the circumstances of the individual case concerned.
(*)
OJ C 293, 4.9.2017.