Several applicants who received decisions from the Commissioner General for Refugees and Stateless Persons following requests for international protection lodged at the border and rendered after the expiry of the four-week period provided for in Article 43(2) of the recast Asylum Procedures Directive (APD), lodged appeals with the Council for Alien Law Litigation. The Council decided on 22 January 2024. It observed that until the decisions were taken, the applicants continued to be kept in the same place which was geographically located in the territory.

After recalling the relevant European and national provisions and their practical implication, the Council referred preliminary questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union, first related to the qualification – before and after the expiration of the four-week period provided for in Article 43.2 of the recast APD – of a procedure carried out in a place of maintenance located geographically on the territory, but assimilated by a regulatory text to a place located at the border and on the extent of the powers of the asylum authorities within the framework of this or these procedure(s), while the second question relates to the right to an effective remedy, namely to the obligations of the national judge who finds that irregularities have been committed in the context of a border procedure and whether the judge is under the obligation to raise ex officio the expiry of the four weeks deadline.

The cases were registered with the CJEU under C-50/24 [Danané], C-51/24 [Jalal], C-52/24 [Tartous], C-53/24 [Daraa], C-54/24 [Rabat], C-55/24 [Casablanca], C-56/24 [Zawiya].