Access to Justice and Joint Liability in Return Operations. Frontex Before the Court of Justice: An Analysis of Cases C-679/23 P and C-136/24 P
Court of Justice, 18 December 2025, Case C-679/23 P, WS and o. v Frontex; 18 December 2025, Case C-136/24 P, Alaa Hamoudi v Frontex
Accesso alla giustizia e responsabilità solidale nelle operazioni di rimpatrio. Frontex dinanzi alla Corte di giustizia: un’analisi delle cause C-679/23 P e C-136/24 P
Accès à la justice et responsabilité solidaire dans les opérations de retour. Frontex devant la Cour de justice : une analyse des affaires C-679/23 P et C-136/24 P
The Court of Justice of the European Union, sitting as a Grand Chamber, delivered two judgements adopted on International Migrants Day, concerning claims for damages brought by individuals against the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex). The applicants alleged fundamental rights violations attributable to Frontex, relating, on the one hand, to participation in joint maritime border surveillance operations and, on the other, to the organization of a joint return flight. Following the setting aside of the judgement and the referral back ordered by the Court of Justice, the case now returns to the General Court, which is called upon to rule anew. Although the determination of final remedies still lies with the latter, the decisions under examination represent a significant advancement in strengthening access to justice within the executive governance of migration policies. The judgements in Cases C-679/23 P (WS and others v Frontex) and C-136/24 P (Alaa Hamoudi v Frontex) constitute a turning point in the configuration of the non-contractual liability of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency. From a procedural standpoint, the rulings address fundamental questions such as the remodulation of the burden of proof in the presence of informational asymmetries, the ex officio activation of the General Court’s investigative powers, Frontex’s obligation of documentary cooperation, and the configurability of concurrent liability between the Agency and the Member States. Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights is employed by the Court as a ‘procedural master key’ to guarantee the effectiveness of judicial protection, requiring the adaptation of traditional evidentiary rules to the specificities of damages actions brought by vulnerable individuals. This commentary analyses the procedural aspects of the two judgements, highlighting their systemic impact on the accountability of EU agencies and on the dynamics of litigation before the EU courts in the field of fundamental rights.
