Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie v C and J and S v Staatssecretaris van Veiligheid en Justitie, C-269/18 PPU

33      In those circumstances, the Raad van State (Council of State) decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following questions to the Court for a preliminary ruling:

‘(1)      In the case where a determining authority has rejected an application for international protection as being manifestly unfounded within the meaning of Article 46(6)(a) of Directive [2013/32] and the appeal brought against that rejection before a court under national law does not have automatic suspensive effect, must Article 46(8) of that directive then be interpreted as meaning that the mere lodging of an application for interim relief results in the applicant’s stay on the territory of the Member State no longer being illegal within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive [2008/115] and that he therefore comes within the scope of Directive [2013/33]?

(2)      Is it material to the answer to Question 1 that national law — having regard to the principle of non-refoulement — provides that an applicant will not be removed before a court has, on request, ruled that the outcome of the appeal against the decision refusing international protection cannot be awaited?’