Court
Court of Justice of the European Union
Decided
August 1, 2025
Docket
Joined Cases C-758/24 and C-759/24, references from the Tribunale ordinario di Roma
Citation
ECLI:EU:C:2025:591
Judge
Grand Chamber of fifteen judges, presided over by K. Lenaerts; K. Jürimäe, Judge-Rapporteur. Advocate General J. Richard de la Tour.
Outcome
Other
Disposition
The Court (Grand Chamber) ruled that Articles 36 and 37 and Article 46(3) of Directive 2013/32, read in the light of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, do not preclude a Member State “from designating third countries as safe countries of origin by means of a legislative act, provided that that designation can be subject to judicial review” by any court hearing an action against a decision taken under the special scheme for applicants from such countries; that the Member State must ensure “sufficient and adequate access” to the sources of information on which the designation is based, for the applicant and for the court, and that the court may take account of information it has gathered itself, provided that it is reliable and the adversarial principle is observed; and that Article 37 precludes a Member State “from designating as a safe country of origin a third country which does not satisfy, for certain categories of persons, the material conditions for such a designation”. The two cases go back to the Tribunale ordinario di Roma for decision.
Nationality
Two nationals of Bangladesh, called LC and CP in the judgment. The case names are fictitious: “It does not correspond to the real name of any of the parties to the proceedings.”
Third country
Albania. Held in the Gjadër detention centre under the protocol between Italy and Albania, under which Albania made available two areas of its territory “which fall entirely within the competence of the Italian authorities” (paragraph 20). They applied for international protection there on 16 October 2024 (paragraph 21).
LC and CP were rescued at sea by the Italian authorities and “taken to Albania, where they were placed in the Gjadër detention centre” (paragraph 20). On 17 October 2024 their applications were rejected under an accelerated border procedure “on the ground that LC and CP came from a safe country of origin”. “The detention orders were not validated by the court having jurisdiction and the applicants were, therefore, released” (paragraph 22). In Italy they challenged the decisions before the Tribunale ordinario di Roma (paragraph 23).
Since Italy’s Decree-Law No 158/2024 of 23 October 2024, the list of safe countries of origin, which includes Bangladesh, has appeared in a legislative act rather than in an interministerial decree (paragraphs 18, 19 and 25). The Rome court was uncertain whether that designation was compatible with EU law, in the Court’s summary because it “stems from a legislative act, that the Italian legislature did not disclose its sources of information and that it maintained the option to make that designation even though that third country may not be ‘safe’ for certain categories of its population” (paragraph 39).
The Court of Justice held that designation by legislation is allowed only if a court can review it, that the sources behind it must be accessible, and that under the directive a country may be designated safe only if it is generally safe for its whole population: the directive expresses “the choice of the EU legislature to make the designation of a safe country of origin subject to the condition that the third country is generally safe for its entire population and not only for a part of it” (paragraph 96).
Caution
A preliminary ruling interprets EU law; the Tribunale ordinario di Roma decides the two cases. The Court did not decide whether Bangladesh is safe. Its third point applies Directive 2013/32. Regulation 2024/1348, which applies to applications lodged from 12 June 2026, allows a designation “with exceptions for specific parts of its territory or clearly identifiable categories of persons”, and the Court said it was for the EU legislature to choose when that rule takes effect (paragraphs 15, 17, 106 and 107). The case concerns the designation applied in the centres in Albania, not detention there; the opinions of two Advocates General on detention in the centres are reported in the Coalition’s story of 11 June 2026.
Safe country of origin
Border procedure
Accelerated procedure
Offshore processing
Effective remedy
Judicial review
Detention
The court's own text
Public copy
Read in full in the English text on EUR-Lex (CELEX 62024CJ0758) on 8 November 2026.
This entry describes a court decision. It is a summary for readers who are learning how these cases work, not legal advice, and it does not tell anyone what to do in their own case. A decision may have been appealed, stayed, or superseded since this entry was written.
← All decisions in the register