Request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour du travail de Liège (Belgium) lodged on 10 February 2020 — Agence fédérale pour l’Accueil des demandeurs d’asile (Fedasil) v Ms C.

(Case C-68/20)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour du travail de Liège

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Agence fédérale pour l’Accueil des demandeurs d’asile (Fedasil)

Defendant: Ms C.

Questions referred

Is a remedy, provided by domestic law to asylum seekers who have been requested to have their applications for international protection examined in another Member State, which does not have suspensory effect and may acquire such effect only if the asylum seeker is deprived of liberty with a view to his imminent transfer an effective remedy within the meaning of Article 27 of the Dublin III Regulation? 1

Must the effective remedy prescribed in Article 27 of the Dublin III Regulation be interpreted as precluding only the implementation of a measure of enforced transfer while an action brought against that transfer decision is being examined or as prohibiting any measure preparatory to removal, such as relocation to a centre which establishes return paths for asylum seekers who have been requested to have their asylum applications examined in another European country?

____________

1     Regulation (EU) No 604/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 establishing the criteria and mechanisms for determining the Member State responsible for examining an application for international protection lodged in one of the Member States by a third-country national or a stateless person (OJ 2013 L 180, p. 31).