About the judgment:
In 2016, the applicants, a number of Syrian nationals arrived in the Greek islands. After expressing their wish to apply for international protection on the island of Minos, they were returned to Turkey following a joint return operation of Greece and Frontex, from where they moved to Iraq. According to the applicants, Frontex infringed on its obligations relating to the protection of their fundamental rights which resulted in their unlawful return to Turkey and refusal of international protection. The applicants claimed compensation for material and non-material damages that they suffered as a result, including expenses for the journey to Greece, in Turkey and Iraq, and for the fear, anguish and suffering during the return and dangerous journey to Iraq.
In its judgment, the General Court found that Frontex does not assess the merits of return decisions and examine the applications for international protection but merely provides technical and operational support to the Member State in question. It found no causal link between the alleged unlawful conduct of Frontex and the various forms of damage suffered by the applicants. The General Court, thus, dismissed the claim for damages. The judgment has been criticised for allowing Frontex to escape accountability, and understating its role in the joint action with Member States on the EU external border.
The judgment may be of particular interest for researchers working in the field of migration, the executive power of the EU, the EU agencies and the division of responsibility between the EU and Member States.