Article 31
3. Article 31, which is also part of Chapter V1 to the Directive, is entitled ‘procedural safeguards’. It provides:
Procedural safeguards
1. The persons concerned shall have access to judicial and, where appropriate, administrative redress procedures in the host Member State to appeal against or seek review of any decision taken against them on the grounds of public policy, public security or public health. 2. Where the application for appeal against or judicial review of the expulsion decision is accompanied by an application for an interim order to suspend enforcement of that decision, actual removal from the territory may not take place until such time as the decision on the interim order has been taken, except: - where the expulsion decision is based on a previous judicial decision; or - where the persons concerned have had previous access to judicial review; or - where the expulsion decision is based on imperative grounds of public security under Article 28(3). 3. The redress procedures shall allow for an examination of the legality of the decision, as well as of the facts and circumstances on which the proposed measure is based. They shall ensure that the decision is not disproportionate, particularly in view of the requirements laid down in Article 28. 4. Member States may exclude the individual concerned from their territory pending the redress procedure, but they may not prevent the individual from submitting his/her defence in person, except when his/her appearance may cause serious troubles to public policy or public security or when the appeal or judicial review concerns a denial of entry to the territory.
- JUDGE STOREY
- Kiarie, R (On the Application Of) and Another v The Secretary of State for the Home Department
- Kiarie and Byndloss
- The 2004 Citizens Directive
- Article 27
- Article 28
- Article 31
- The 2006 EEA Regulations
- Home Office Guidance
- The application
- The statutory appeal
- The decision under challenge
- The grant of permission
- Department
- The grounds
- Macastena
- Kiarie & Byndloss
- ANALYSIS
- udicial redress
- Suspensive effect
- The regulation 24AA test
- ground
- Regulation 24AA as a discretionary power
- Regulation 24AA as a temporary measure tied to the appeals process
- in-time appeal:
- The proportionality issue
- Kiarie & Byndloss
- The right of “defence” in person and regulation 29AA
- Meaning of Exclusion
- Right to be heard
- Ahmed, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (EEA/s 10 appeal rights: effec
- Khaled Boudjlida
- EU:C2010:146
- EU:C:2013:588
- Pecastaing v Belgium
- case
- THE APPLICANT’S CASE
- Kiarie and Byndloss
- JR (in the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
- Ukus
- Annex A
- Note:
- Human rights considerations and interim orders to suspend removal
- here
