# C_2017309EN.01001402.xml

| 18.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 309/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 309/14

---

Judgment of the Court (Grand Chamber) of 26 July 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije — Slovenia) — A.S. v Republika Slovenija

(Case C-490/16) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 - Determination of the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national - Arrival of an exceptionally large number of third-country nationals wishing to obtain international protection - Organisation by the authorities of a Member State of the crossing of the border for the purpose of transit to another Member State - Entry authorised by way of derogation for humanitarian reasons - Article 13 - Irregular crossing of an external border - Period of 12 months from the crossing of the border - Article 27 - Remedy - Scope of judicial review - Article 29 - Period of six months for the purpose of effecting the transfer - Running of the periods - Use of an appeal - Suspensory effect))

(2017/C 309/19)

Language of the case: Slovenian

Referring court

Referring court

Vrhovno sodišče Republike Slovenije

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: A.S.

Applicant:

Defendant: Republika Slovenija

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

| 1. | On a proper construction of Article 27(1) of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person, read in the light of recital 19 of that regulation, an applicant for international protection is entitled, in an appeal against a decision to transfer him, to plead incorrect application of the criterion for determining responsibility relating to the irregular crossing of the border of a Member State, laid down in Article 13(1) of that regulation. |
| --- | --- |

1.

On a proper construction of Article 27(1) of Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person, read in the light of recital 19 of that regulation, an applicant for international protection is entitled, in an appeal against a decision to transfer him, to plead incorrect application of the criterion for determining responsibility relating to the irregular crossing of the border of a Member State, laid down in Article 13(1) of that regulation.

| 2. | On a proper construction of Article 13(1) of Regulation No 604/2013, a third-country national whose entry has been tolerated by the authorities of a first Member State faced with the arrival of an exceptionally large number of third-country nationals wishing to transit through that Member State in order to lodge an application for international protection in another Member State, without satisfying the entry conditions in principle required in that first Member State, must be regarded as having ‘irregularly crossed’ the border of that first Member State, within the meaning of that provision. |
| --- | --- |

2.

On a proper construction of Article 13(1) of Regulation No 604/2013, a third-country national whose entry has been tolerated by the authorities of a first Member State faced with the arrival of an exceptionally large number of third-country nationals wishing to transit through that Member State in order to lodge an application for international protection in another Member State, without satisfying the entry conditions in principle required in that first Member State, must be regarded as having ‘irregularly crossed’ the border of that first Member State, within the meaning of that provision.

| 3. | On a proper construction of Article 13(1), second sentence, of Regulation No 604/2013, read together with Article 7(2) of that regulation, the lodging of an appeal against a transfer decision has no effect on the running of the period laid down in Article 13(1). |
| --- | --- |

3.

On a proper construction of Article 13(1), second sentence, of Regulation No 604/2013, read together with Article 7(2) of that regulation, the lodging of an appeal against a transfer decision has no effect on the running of the period laid down in Article 13(1).

On a proper construction of Article 29(1) and (2) of that regulation, the lodging of such an appeal means that the period laid down by those provisions does not start to run until the final decision on that appeal, including when the court hearing the appeal has decided to request a preliminary ruling from the Court of Justice, as long as that appeal had suspensory effect in accordance with Article 27(3) of that regulation.

---

(1)  OJ C 419, 14.11.2016.

1

---