The case concerned a request for a preliminary ruling submitted by the Court of the Hague seated in Roermond, on the interpretation of the EU Charter and the Return Directive - K,L,M,N v State Secretary for Justice and Security (Staatssecretaris van Justitie en Veiligheid), 13 March 2023.
The case concerned the lawfulness of a decision rejecting the application for a residence permit provided by Dutch law and finding that the applicant's residence in the Netherlands was illegal. Consequently, the case also concerned the enforcement of a return decision previously adopted in a procedure for international protection.
The court concluded that:
1. Article 5 of the Return Directive, read in conjunction with Article 19(2) of the EU Charter, must be interpreted as requiring an administrative authority which rejects an application for a residence permit based on national law and, consequently, finds that the third-country national concerned is staying illegally on the territory of the Member State in question, to ensure compliance with the principle of non-refoulement, by reviewing, in the light of that principle, the return decision previously adopted against that national in the context of a procedure for international protection, the suspension of which came to an end following such a rejection.
2. Article 13(1) and (2) of the Return Directive, read in conjunction with Article 5 of that directive and with Article 19(2) and Article 47 of the EU Charter, must be interpreted as requiring a national court which is requested to review the legality of an act whereby the competent national authority has rejected an application for a residence permit provided for by national law, and, in so doing, has brought to an end the suspension of the enforcement of a return decision previously adopted in the context of a procedure for international protection, to raise of its own motion any infringement of the principle of non-refoulement resulting from the enforcement of the latter decision, on the basis of the material in the file brought to its attention, as supplemented or clarified following adversarial proceedings.