Provisional text
ORDER OF THE COURT (Grand Chamber)
12 July 2017 (*)
(Opening of the oral part of the procedure — Decision to hold a hearing)
In Case C‑353/16,
REQUEST for a preliminary ruling under Article 267 TFEU from the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, made by decision of 22 June 2016, received at the Court on 27 June 2016, in the proceedings
MP
v
Secretary of State for the Home Department,
THE COURT (Grand Chamber),
composed of K. Lenaerts, President, A. Tizzano, Vice-President, R. Silva de Lapuerta, T. von Danwitz, J.L. da Cruz Vilaça, E. Juhász, M. Berger, M. Vilaras and E. Regan, Presidents of Chambers, A. Borg Barthet, J. Malenovský, E. Levits, C. Vajda, K. Jürimäe and C. Lycourgos (Rapporteur), Judges,
Advocate General: Y. Bot,
Registrar: A. Calot Escobar,
after hearing the Advocate General,
makes the following
Order
1 The request for a preliminary ruling concerns the interpretation of Article 2(e) and Article 15(b) of Council Directive 2004/83/EC of 29 April 2004 on minimum standards for the qualification and status of third country nationals or stateless persons as refugees or as persons who otherwise need international protection and the content of the protection granted (OJ 2004 L 304, p. 12).
2 The request has been made in proceedings between MP and the Secretary of State for the Home Department concerning the latter’s rejection of MP’s asylum application.
3 By decision of 7 March 2017, the Court referred the case to the Fourth Chamber and decided, pursuant to Article 76(2) of its Rules of Procedure, not to hold a hearing. Furthermore, it decided that the case would be determined without an Opinion of the Advocate General.
4 After carrying out a fresh examination of the case, the Court considers that it is necessary for there to be a thorough discussion before it, in particular as regards the questions (i) whether the fact that MP’s current health problems are caused by the torture he was subject to in his country of origin is liable to affect, in any way, his eligibility for subsidiary protection and (ii) whether the obligations under Article 14(1) of the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment adopted in New York on 10 December 1984 are relevant in that connection.
5 The Court has therefore decided to reallocate this case to the Grand Chamber, which will give its decision after the Advocate General has delivered his Opinion.
6 The Court also considers that it is necessary, in accordance with Article 83 of its Rules of Procedure, to order that the oral part of the procedure be opened in order to enable the interested parties referred to in Article 23 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union to submit any observations which they might wish to make on the questions mentioned in paragraph 4 above.
On those grounds, the Court (Grand Chamber) hereby orders:
1. The oral procedure in Case C‑353/16 is opened.
2. The date for the hearing shall be set by separate document.
3. The interested parties referred to in Article 23 of the Statute of the Court of Justice of the European Union are requested to express their views by way of written submissions, which must not exceed five pages and must be lodged with the Court no later than 10 August 2017, including the extension on account of distance, on the questions set out in the Annex to this order.
4. The costs are reserved.
Luxembourg, 12 July 2017.
A. Calot Escobar | | K. Lenaerts |
Annex M’Bodj