CELEX: 62017CA0404
Language: en
Date: 2018-07-25 00:00:00
Title: Case C-404/17: Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 25 July 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Förvaltningsrätten i Malmö — Sweden) — A v Migrationsverket (Reference for a preliminary ruling — Asylum policy — Directive 2013/32/EU — Article 31(8) and Article 32(2) — Manifestly unfounded application for international protection — Concept of safe country of origin — No national rules concerning that concept — Applicant’s representations considered to be reliable but insufficient having regard to the satisfactory protection offered by the applicant’s country of origin)

17.9.2018   
            
            
               EN
            
            
               Official Journal of the European Union
            
            
               C 328/20
            
         
      Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 25 July 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Förvaltningsrätten i Malmö — Sweden) — A v Migrationsverket
      (Case C-404/17) (1)
      
      ((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Asylum policy - Directive 2013/32/EU - Article 31(8) and Article 32(2) - Manifestly unfounded application for international protection - Concept of safe country of origin - No national rules concerning that concept - Applicant’s representations considered to be reliable but insufficient having regard to the satisfactory protection offered by the applicant’s country of origin))
      (2018/C 328/24)
      Language of the case: Swedish
      
         Referring court
      
      Förvaltningsrätten i Malmö
      
         Parties to the main proceedings
      
      
         Applicant: A
      
         Defendant: Migrationsverket
      
         Operative part of the judgment
      
      Article 31(8)(b) of Directive 2013/32/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on common procedures for granting and withdrawing international protection, read in conjunction with Article 32(2) of that directive, must be interpreted as not allowing an application for international protection to be regarded as manifestly unfounded in a situation, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, in which, first, it is apparent from the information on the applicant’s country of origin that acceptable protection can be ensured for him in that country and, secondly, the applicant has provided insufficient information to justify the grant of international protection, where the Member State in which the application was lodged has not adopted rules implementing the concept of safe country of origin.
      
         (1)  OJ C 293, 4.9.2017.