A.B., a national of Burkina Faso, requested international protection in France on 2 February 2026. By decision of 30 March 2026, the Prefect of Doubs ordered her transfer to Belgium, responsible for examining her application for international protection. The applicant did not appear for the flight to Brussels on 5 August 2026 and by decision of 1 September 2026, the French Office for Immigration and Integration (OFII) decided to terminate the material reception conditions she was receiving on the grounds that she had not complied with the requirements of the asylum authorities by not appearing at the airport.

The applicant requested the Administrative Court of Dijon to overturn the decision to terminate her reception conditions. The court first observed that the OFII revoked the contested decision, on 21 September 2026. However, since from the case file it did not appear that the decision had become final, her appeal was considered valid.

The court further noted the provisions of Article 23 of the Reception Conditions Directive 2024 and of Article 20 of the recast Reception Conditions Directive (RCD). It observed that the decision terminating material reception conditions was made pursuant to the recast RCD, and in the applicant's case, not appearing for the flight amounted to non-compliance with her obligations, only a partial withdrawal of the benefit of material reception conditions could be ordered as she fell under point 3 of Article L. 551-16 of CESEDA, for which a total termination of reception conditions could not be ordered.

Therefore, OFII could not legally terminate the material reception conditions enjoyed by the applicant, whose asylum application and transfer decision to Belgium predated 12 June 2026.

Therefore, the court allowed the appeal as well-founded.