- 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-382/18: Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 11 June 2018 — V.G., other party: Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid
ECLI:EU:UNKNOWN:62018CN0382
62018CN0382
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
(Case C-382/18)
Language of the case: Dutch
Referring court
Parties to the main proceedings
Applicant: V.G.
Questions referred
1.Does the Court of Justice, having regard to Article 3(3) of Directive 2003/86/EC (1) … and the Nolan judgment (ECLI:EU:C:2012:638), have the jurisdiction to answer questions referred for a preliminary ruling by a Netherlands court on the interpretation of certain provisions of that Directive in a dispute concerning an application for entry and residence of a family member of a sponsor who has Netherlands nationality, if that Directive was declared to apply directly and unconditionally to such family members in Netherlands law?
2.Must Article 6(1) of Directive 2003/86/EC … be interpreted as meaning that the rejection of an application for entry and residence of a family member on the grounds of public policy requires that reasons be stated as to why the personal conduct of the family member concerned poses a genuine, present and sufficiently serious threat to one of the fundamental interests of society?
3.If question 2 is to be answered in the negative, what are the requirements under Article 6(2) of Directive 2003/86/EC … that apply to the reasons for rejecting an application for entry and residence of a family member on the grounds of public policy? Must Article 6(2) of Directive 2003/86/EC … therefore be interpreted as precluding a national practice according to which an application for entry and residence of a family member can be rejected on grounds of public policy on the basis of convictions during an earlier stay in the Member State concerned, so that, based on the criteria laid down in the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (the ECtHR) of 2 August 2001, Boultif v Switzerland, CE:ECHR:2001:0802JUD005427300, and of 18 October 2006, Üner v The Netherlands, CE:ECHR:2006:1018JUD004641099, a balance is struck between the interest of the family member concerned and the sponsor concerned to exercise the right to family reunification in the Netherlands, on the one hand, and the interests of the Netherlands State to protect public order, on the other hand?
Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification (OJ 2003 L 251, p. 12).
* * *
Language of the case: Dutch