Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2018] All ER (D) 53 (Jan)
Court: Court of Justice of the European Union (Fifth Chamber)
Judge:

Judges da Cruz Vilaca (President of the Chamber), da Cruz Vilaca (President of the Chamber), Levits (Rapporteur), Borg Barthet, Berger and Biltgen

Judgment Dates: 16 January 2018

Catchwords

European Union - Immigration - Entry ban

The Case

European Union Immigration. Article 25(2) of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement should be interpreted as meaning that it was open to the contracting state which intended to issue a return decision accompanied by a ban on entry and stay in the Schengen Area to a third-country national who held a valid residence permit issued by another contracting state to initiate the consultation procedure laid down in that provision even before the issue of the return decision. That procedure should, in any event, be initiated as soon as such a decision had been issued. The Court of Justice of the European Union so held in a preliminary ruling in proceedings concerning a Nigerian national in connection with the Finnish National Immigration Service's decision to return E to his home country and to ban him from entering the Schengen Area.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.