Joined Cases C-636/23 and C-637/23, Al Hoceima and Boghni: Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 1 August 2025 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Raad voor Vreemdelingenbetwistingen and the Conseil du contentieux des étrangers – Belgium) – W, X v Belgische Staat (References for a preliminary ruling – Border controls, asylum and immigration – Immigration policy – Directive 2008/115/EC – Common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals – Article 3(4) and (6), Article 7(1) and (4), Article 8(1) and (2), Article 11(1) and Article 13 – Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union – Return decision – Decision not to grant a period for voluntary departure – Entry ban – Actionable administrative act – Enforceability of a return decision not containing a provision relating to the period for voluntary departure – Right to an effective remedy – Entry ban decision adopted after a considerable period of time)
Date: 2025-08-01
Institutions: Court of Justice
Subjects: EU migration policy, foreign national, illegal migration, removal, return migration, right to an effective remedy, right to justice, third country








C_202505065EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5065


29.9.2025






Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 1 August 2025 (requests for a preliminary ruling from the Raad voor Vreemdelingenbetwistingen and the Conseil du contentieux des étrangers – Belgium) – W, X v Belgische Staat


(Joined Cases C-636/23 and C-637/23,
                (1)
Al Hoceima and Boghni
                (2)
)

(References for a preliminary ruling - Border controls, asylum and immigration - Immigration policy - Directive 2008/115/EC - Common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals - Article 3(4) and (6), Article 7(1) and (4), Article 8(1) and (2), Article 11(1) and Article 13 - Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Return decision - Decision not to grant a period for voluntary departure - Entry ban - Actionable administrative act - Enforceability of a return decision not containing a provision relating to the period for voluntary departure - Right to an effective remedy - Entry ban decision adopted after a considerable period of time)
(C/2025/5065)
Languages of the case: French and Dutch

Referring courts

Raad voor Vreemdelingenbetwistingen, Conseil du contentieux des étrangers

Parties to the main proceedings


Applicants: W (C-636/23), X (C-637/23)

Defendants: Belgische Staat (C-636/23), État belge, represented by the Secrétaire d’État à l’Asile et la Migration (C-637/23)

Operative part of the judgment







1.


Article 7(4), Article 8(1) and (2) and Article 11(1) of Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals
must be interpreted as meaning that they preclude the decision not to grant a period for voluntary departure from being regarded merely as an enforcement measure which does not alter the legal position of the third-country national concerned.










2.


Article 13 of Directive 2008/115, read in the light of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
must be interpreted as meaning that a decision not to grant a period for voluntary departure must be open to challenge in legal proceedings.










3.


Article 3(6) and Article 11(1) of Directive 2008/115
must be interpreted as not precluding the competent national authority from imposing an entry ban, even after a considerable period of time, on the basis of a return decision that does not grant a period for voluntary departure.










4.


Article 3(4) and Article 7 of Directive 2008/115
must be interpreted as meaning that the provision relating to the period for voluntary departure contained in a return decision is an integral part of the obligation to return imposed or set out by that decision, with the result that, if any unlawfulness is found as regards that provision relating to the period for voluntary departure, that decision must be annulled in its entirety.






(1)  OJ C, C/2024/1387, C/2024/1388.

(2)  The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5065/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)