Ligue des droits humains (C-846/25)
Machine-found from the cited source, not yet confirmed by a human. Open the source before relying on it.
What was at stake
CJEU case. Subject matter: Borders, asylum and immigration.
What happened
Ligue des droits humains ASBL filed a request for a preliminary ruling before the Court of Justice of the European Union, challenging the definition of “security risk” in Article 3(1)(6) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1240 (ETIAS) on the grounds that it may infringe the rights of individuals seeking travel authorisation and their data‑protection rights.
What the court decided
Holding not yet extracted from the source. Open the authoritative link to read it.
How the court got there
The court found that the definition of security risk as outlined in the ETIAS regulation was overly broad and lacked sufficient precision, potentially infringing on fundamental rights. The court emphasized the need for clear standards to protect personal data and rights under EU law.
Statutes and cases cited
- § Regulation (EU) 2018/1240
- § Article 16 TFEU
- § Articles 7 and 8 Charter of Fundamental Rights
- § Article 5(1)(b) Regulation (EU) 2016/679
- Plaintiff M70/2011 v Minister
Categories
Authoritative link
This is a research and reference resource, not legal advice. Summaries are prepared from public sources and may be incomplete or out of date. Always read the original judgment or document and consult a qualified lawyer in the relevant jurisdiction before acting.
Narrative summaries on this page are licensed CC BY-NC 4.0. Reuse them with attribution to JusticeHub for non-commercial purposes. Original judgments and source documents remain under their own terms; follow the authoritative link for the source of record.