Title	OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL MENGOZZI in case C-380/17 Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie, K, B joined party H. Y., (2) Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie
Publisher	European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union
Publication Date	27 June 2018
Country	Netherlands
Topics	Family reunification | Right to family life
Related Document(s)	K, B v Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie (C-380/17) (request for preliminary ruling)
Cite as	OPINION OF ADVOCATE GENERAL MENGOZZI in case C-380/17 Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie, K, B joined party H. Y., (2) Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie , European Union: Court of Justice of the European Union, 27 June 2018, available at: https://www.refworld.org/cases,ECJ,5c5acb104.html [accessed 21 May 2023]
Comments	(1) The Court has jurisdiction to answer the questions referred for a preliminary ruling by the referring court which relate to the interpretation of the provisions of Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification in a case concerning the right of residence of a member of the family of a beneficiary of subsidiary protection status, where the provisions of that directive have been declared directly and unconditionally applicable to the beneficiaries of subsidiary protection status in national law. (2) The system provided for under Directive 2003/86 precludes a national provision, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, under which an application for family reunification on the basis of the more favourable provisions of Chapter V of that directive can be rejected for the sole reason that it was not submitted within the three-month period laid down in the third subparagraph of Article 12(1) of that directive, since that period cannot be regarded as a time bar and that application must be considered in the light of Article 7 and Article 24(2) and (3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which require the Member States to examine applications for family reunification in the interests of the children concerned, with a view to promoting family life and preventing both the objective and the effectiveness of Directive 2003/86 from being undermined. In addition, the failure to have regard to the guiding principles of that directive in the event of the rejection of an application for family reunification for the purposes of Article 12 thereof because the three-month period provided for in the third subparagraph of paragraph 1 of that article is exceeded cannot be justified by the fact that the examination of another application submitted under Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/86 would take account of those guiding principles.
Disclaimer	This is not a UNHCR publication. UNHCR is not responsible for, nor does it necessarily endorse, its content. Any views expressed are solely those of the author or publisher and do not necessarily reflect those of UNHCR, the United Nations or its Member States.