# C_2017269EN.01000202.xml

| 14.8.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 269/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.8.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 269/2

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Raad van State (Netherlands) lodged on 15 May 2017 — C, A v Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie

(Case C-257/17)

(2017/C 269/03)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Raad van State

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: C, A

Appellants:

Respondent: Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie

Respondent:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Having regard to Article 3(3) of Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification (OJ 2003 L 251, [p. 12]) and to the Nolan judgment (C-583/10, EU:C:2012:638), does the Court of Justice have jurisdiction to answer questions referred for a preliminary ruling by the courts of the Netherlands concerning the interpretation of certain provisions of that directive in proceedings relating to the right of residence of members of the family of sponsors who have Netherlands nationality, if that directive has been declared to be directly and unconditionally applicable under Netherlands law to those family members? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Having regard to Article 3(3) of Council Directive 2003/86/EC of 22 September 2003 on the right to family reunification (OJ 2003 L 251, [p. 12]) and to the Nolan judgment (C-583/10, EU:C:2012:638), does the Court of Justice have jurisdiction to answer questions referred for a preliminary ruling by the courts of the Netherlands concerning the interpretation of certain provisions of that directive in proceedings relating to the right of residence of members of the family of sponsors who have Netherlands nationality, if that directive has been declared to be directly and unconditionally applicable under Netherlands law to those family members?

Nolan

| 2. | Should Article 15(1) and (4) of Council Directive 2003/86/EC ... be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, under which an application for an autonomous residence permit on the part of a foreign national who has resided lawfully for more than five years on the territory of a Member State for family-reunification purposes may be rejected because of non-compliance with conditions relating to integration laid down in national law? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Should Article 15(1) and (4) of Council Directive 2003/86/EC ... be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, under which an application for an autonomous residence permit on the part of a foreign national who has resided lawfully for more than five years on the territory of a Member State for family-reunification purposes may be rejected because of non-compliance with conditions relating to integration laid down in national law?

| 3. | Should Article 15(1) and (4) of Council Directive 2003/86/EC ... be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, on the basis of which an autonomous residence permit cannot be granted earlier than the date on which it is applied for? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Should Article 15(1) and (4) of Council Directive 2003/86/EC ... be interpreted as precluding national legislation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, on the basis of which an autonomous residence permit cannot be granted earlier than the date on which it is applied for?

---