Request for a preliminary ruling from the Flygtningenævnet København (Denmark) lodged on 8 September 2023 — H (assisted by DRC Dansk Flygtningehjælp) v Udlændingestyrelsen

(Case C-560/23, Tang (1))

(C/2023/645)

Language of the case: Danish

Referring court

Flygtningenævnet København

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: H (assisted by DRC Dansk Flygtningehjælp)

Defendant: Udlændingestyrelsen

Question referred

Are the time limit provisions in Article 29(1) and (2) of the Dublin III Regulation (2) to be interpreted as meaning that the time limit of six months laid down in the second part of Article 29(1) of that regulation is to run from the final, substantive decision in the case, in a situation where an appellate body in the requesting Member State, as referred to in Article 27 of the Dublin III Regulation, has remitted the transfer case back to the competent authority at first instance, which subsequently made a fresh transfer decision more than six months after receipt of the acceptance by the Member State responsible, including where the remittal is based on the fact that the Member State responsible, which had initially accepted the transfer, subsequently decided to suspend all transfers under the Dublin III Regulation, and where suspensive effect has been granted as regards the removal of the person concerned?

(1)  The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings.

(2)  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).