Preliminary ruling. The case (before the referring court) concerned the extension of the administrative detention of Mr Arib, who entered France irregularly. The referring court asked whether Article 32 of the Schengen Borders Code is to be interpreted as meaning that border controls reintroduced at an internal border of a Member State may be equated with border controls at an external border, when that border is crossed by a third-country national who has no right of entry and whether in such circumstances that code and Directive 2008/115 permit the application, to the situation of a third-country national crossing a border at which controls have been reintroduced, of the power, conferred on the Member States by Article 2(2)(a) of the directive, to continue to apply simplified national return procedures at their external borders? CJEU answered that Article 2(2)(a) of Directive 2008/115, read in conjunction with Article 32 of the Schengen Borders Code, must be interpreted as not applying to the situation of an illegally staying third-country national who was apprehended in the immediate vicinity of an internal border of a Member State, even where that Member State has reintroduced border control at that border, pursuant to Article 25 of the code, on account of a serious threat to public policy or internal security in that Member State.
Court of Cassation, France (in the proceedings Préfet des Pyrénées-Orientales v Abdelaziz Arib, Procureur de la République près le tribunal de grande instance de Montpellier, Procureur général près la cour d’appel de Montpellier) – C‑444/17
Relevant Law Article 32 Regulation (EU) 2016/399; Articles 2(2)(a) and 4(4) Directive 2008/115/EC
Found for N/A