Case Law
|
XXXX contre Commissaire général aux réfugiés et aux apatrides, C-483/20
This request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Articles 18 and 24 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’), Articles 2, 20, 23 and 31 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 (OJ 2011 L 337, p. 9), and of Article 25(6) and Article 33(2)(a) of Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection (OJ 2013 L 180, p. 60). 22 February 2022 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Legal Instrument: 2011 Recast Qualification Directive (EU) | Topic(s): Family reunification - Right to family life - Unaccompanied / Separated children | Countries: Austria - Belgium - Syrian Arab Republic |
|
OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL PIKAMÄE, in Case C‑483/20 XXXX
v Commissaire général aux réfugiés et aux apatrides (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État (Belgium))
1. Migratory journeys are often the result of a combination of two elements: chance and necessity. In the case before the Court, a Syrian national, after travelling through Libya and Turkey, arrived in Austria, where, out of necessity, he lodged an application for international protection. After obtaining refugee status, he went to Belgium to be reunited with his two children, one of whom is a minor, and there lodged a new application for international protection, which was declared inadmissible in view of the prior recognition granted in the first Member State. 2. It is against that background that the question arises, to my knowledge for the first time, whether, in particular, the fundamental right to respect for family life enshrined in Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (‘the Charter’), read in conjunction with the obligation to take into consideration the child’s best interests set out in Article 24(2) of the Charter, can override the inadmissibility mechanism for applications for international protection laid down in Article 33(2)(a) of Directive 2013/32/EU. (2) 30 September 2021 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Legal Instrument: 2013 Dublin III Regulation (EU) | Topic(s): Refugee status determination (RSD) / Asylum procedures - Right to family life | Countries: Austria - Belgium - Syrian Arab Republic |
|
Conclusions de l'avocat Général M. Paolo Mengozzi: X, X c. État belge
7 February 2017 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Topic(s): Family reunification - Right to family life | Countries: Belgium - Syrian Arab Republic |
|
Paposhvili c. Belgique
17 April 2014 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Deportation / Forcible return - Expulsion - Freedom from torture, inhuman and degrading treatment - Illegal immigrants / Undocumented migrants - National security / Public order - Right to family life - Right to health - Suspensive effect | Countries: Belgium - Georgia - Italy |
|
Federaal agentschap voor de opvang van asielzoekers v. Selver Saciri and others
27 February 2014 | Judicial Body: European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union | Topic(s): Children's rights - Reception - Regional instruments - Right to family life | Countries: Belgium |
|
Arrêt n° 9681
22 May 2013 | Judicial Body: Belgium: Conseil d'État | Topic(s): Family reunification - Immigration law - Right to family life | Countries: Belgium |
|
Possemiers v. Spain
Ninety-seventh session of the Human Rights Committee (12-30 November 2009). 23 November 2009 | Judicial Body: UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) | Topic(s): Criminal justice - Exhaustion of domestic remedies - Forced labour - Freedom of movement - Independence of judiciary - Pre-trial detention - Right to family life - Right to justice | Countries: Belgium - Spain |
|
Anakomba Yula c. Belgique
Cet arrêt deviendra définitif dans les conditions définies à l'article 44 § 2 de la Convention. Il peut subir des retouches de forme. 10 March 2009 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Topic(s): Access to procedures - Criminal justice - Right to family life | Countries: Belgium - Congo, Democratic Republic of the |
|
Arrêt n° 95/2008 du 26 juin 2008
This is a decision on the constitutionality of certain aspects of the Belgian Aliens Act of 15 December 1980 (Loi du 15 décembre 1980 sur l'accès au territoire, le séjour, l'établissement et l'éloignement des étrangers), as amended by the law of 15 September 2006. 26 June 2008 | Judicial Body: Belgium: Cour constitutionnelle | Topic(s): Family reunification - Right to family life | Countries: Belgium |
|
Moustaquim v. Belgium
18 February 1991 | Judicial Body: Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights | Countries: Belgium - Morocco |
