# C_2020348EN.01000801.xml

| 19.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 348/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 348/8

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark (Austria) lodged on 5 August 2020 — NW v Bezirkshauptmannschaft Leibnitz

(Case C-369/20)

(2020/C 348/12)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landesverwaltungsgericht Steiermark

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: NW

Respondent authority: Bezirkshauptmannschaft Leibnitz

Questions referred

| 1. | Does EU law preclude domestic legislation in the form of consecutive domestic decrees prolonging border control which, cumulatively, allow for the reintroduction of border control for a period which exceeds the two-year time limit laid down in Article 25 and Article 29 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 (1) without a corresponding Council recommendation pursuant to Article 29 of that regulation? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does EU law preclude domestic legislation in the form of consecutive domestic decrees prolonging border control which, cumulatively, allow for the reintroduction of border control for a period which exceeds the two-year time limit laid down in Article 25 and Article 29 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 (1) without a corresponding Council recommendation pursuant to Article 29 of that regulation?

| 2. | Is the right to freedom of movement of EU citizens laid down in Article 21(1) TFEU and Article 45(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2) to be interpreted, especially in the light of the principle of the absence of checks on persons at internal borders established in Article 22 of Regulation 2016/399, as meaning that it includes the right not to be subject to checks on persons at internal borders, subject to the conditions and exceptions listed in the Treaties and, in particular, in the above regulation? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is the right to freedom of movement of EU citizens laid down in Article 21(1) TFEU and Article 45(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (2) to be interpreted, especially in the light of the principle of the absence of checks on persons at internal borders established in Article 22 of Regulation 2016/399, as meaning that it includes the right not to be subject to checks on persons at internal borders, subject to the conditions and exceptions listed in the Treaties and, in particular, in the above regulation?

| 3. | If question 2 is answered in the affirmative:
  Are Article 21(1) TFEU and Article 45(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights to be interpreted, in light of the effectiveness of the right to freedom of movement, as precluding the application of national legislation which obliges a person, on pain of receiving an administrative penalty, to present a passport or identity card on entry via an internal border, even where the particular check at the internal border is contrary to the provisions of EU law? |
| --- | --- |

3.

If question 2 is answered in the affirmative:

Are Article 21(1) TFEU and Article 45(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights to be interpreted, in light of the effectiveness of the right to freedom of movement, as precluding the application of national legislation which obliges a person, on pain of receiving an administrative penalty, to present a passport or identity card on entry via an internal border, even where the particular check at the internal border is contrary to the provisions of EU law?

---

(1)  Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) (OJ 2016 L 77, p. 1), as corrected by OJ 2018 L 272, p. 69).

(2)  OJ 2012 C 326, p. 391.

---