(AGENPARL) – Thu 18 December 2025 PRESS RELEASE No 163/25
Luxembourg, 18 December 2025
Judgment of the Court in Case C-184/24 | [Sidi Bouzid] 1
International protection: the refusal by an applicant for international
protection to be transferred to another accommodation centre cannot
justify the withdrawal of all material reception conditions
The Member State may nevertheless impose a proportionate sanction that respects the applicant’s dignity and
use its powers of coercion to enforce the transfer
AF and his child, BF, who was a minor at the time of the facts, are applicants for international protection residing in
an accommodation centre in Milan. In 2023, the Prefecture of Milan ordered the withdrawal of the material
reception conditions 2 due to AF’s repeated refusal to be transferred, with his child, to another accommodation
centre, also located in Milan. The transfer had been decided because they were occupying accommodation intended
for four people, while the refusal was due to the fact that the child was pursuing his schooling near the
accommodation centre where they were present. AF is challenging the decision to withdraw his material reception
conditions before the Regional Administrative Court, Lombardy on the grounds that, as a result of that decision, he
is no longer able to meet his basic needs and those of his child. That court asked the Court of Justice whether
national legislation allowing all material reception conditions to be withdrawn as a result of a refusal such as the one
at issue is compatible with the directive on the reception of persons seeking international protection. 3
The Court finds that, in the present case, AF has neither abandoned the accommodation centre, nor withdrawn or
implicitly abandoned his application for international protection, and so the material reception conditions cannot be
withdrawn or reduced on those grounds.
However, the directive allows Member States to impose a sanction for serious breaches of the rules of the
accommodation centres. A refusal such as the one in the present case, where it is persistent and the applicant
objects, without legitimate reason, to his transfer to accommodation appropriate to his circumstances, is liable to
jeopardise the accommodation system of the Member State concerned, since the accommodation in question
cannot be allocated to other applicants whose family situation it would be better suited to. Consequently, such
behaviour may constitute a serious breach of the rules applicable to the accommodation centre that initially
received the applicant and, thus, lead to the imposition of a sanction.
That being said, the national authorities must impose a sanction that is proportionate and respects the dignity of
the applicant, which cannot involve the withdrawal of all material reception conditions or, in any other way,
deprive him or her of the possibility of meeting his or her most basic needs, such as housing, food or clothing.
That is the case in particular where, as in the present case, the applicants concerned – a single parent and his minor
child – are vulnerable persons.
In those circumstances, the Court holds that the directive precludes national legislation which makes it
possible to withdraw, in a situation such as the one at issue, all material reception conditions. However, the
directive does not preclude the national authorities, in compliance with the principle of proportionality and the
Communications Directorate Press and Information Unit
curia.europa.eu
applicant’s fundamental rights and dignity, from using the coercive powers conferred on them by national law to
implement the transfer of that person to another accommodation centre.
NOTE: A reference for a preliminary ruling allows the courts and tribunals of the Member States, in disputes which
have been brought before them, to refer questions to the Court of Justice about the interpretation of EU law or the
validity of an EU act. The Court of Justice does not decide the dispute itself. It is for the national court or tribunal to
dispose of the case in accordance with the Court’s decision. That decision is similarly binding on other national
courts or tribunals before which a similar issue is raised.
Unofficial document for media use, not binding on the Court of Justice.
The full text and, as the case may be, an abstract of the judgment are published on the CURIA website on the day of
delivery.
Stay Connected!
The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any party to the proceedings.
In accordance with Directive 2013/33/UE of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 laying down standards for the reception of
applicants for international protection, material reception conditions are measures that Member States grant to applicants for international
protection, including, in particular, ‘housing, food and clothing’ (Article 2).
See endnote 2.
Communications Directorate