Interim decree inaudita altera parte (Article 700 and Article 669-sexies(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure) · R.G. 9094/2026
Unofficial translation of the SOS Patto summary. The original decision or document is available in Italian only.
Headnote
For the purposes of Article 17(4) of Decree-Law 100/2026, the administrative procedure on the application for protection begins when the applicant expresses the wish to apply for it, regardless of lodging: this follows from Article 2(1)(a) of Legislative Decree 142/2015, which treats as an applicant also a person who has merely expressed the wish. An expression of the wish prior to 12 June 2026 — here a certified e-mail from the lawyer to the Questura of 23 April — is therefore governed by the former rules. From the moment the wish is expressed the applicant is entitled to a residence permit for asylum application or at least to a receipt attesting to it, which, once the time limit for lodging has expired, serves as a provisional permit under Article 4(3) of Legislative Decree 142/2015, and to reception. The Questura's refusal to issue a copy of the C3 form and the receipt exposes the person to arrest, expulsion, exclusion from employment, reception, the population register and the health service: fumus, periculum and the urgency justifying a decree without adversarial proceedings are present, with an order to issue immediately a document indicating the date of the expression of the wish and the data necessary for identification.
The Tribunal of Genoa (judge Andrea Perelli) orders the Questura of La Spezia, inaudita altera parte, to issue immediately a residence permit for asylum application or another document attesting the expression of the wish to apply for protection, stating the date of the expression, of registration or lodging and any element useful for identification. The applicant, a Bangladeshi national, had expressed, by certified e-mail from his lawyer on 23 April 2026, the wish to submit a subsequent application; the appointment had been fixed for 24 June; on that occasion the Questura had refused a copy of the C3 form and of the receipt, without replying to the further request of 5 August; on 4 August the rejection of the application had been notified.
The decree starts from Article 17(4) of Decree-Law 100/2026, read with Article 2(1)(a) of Legislative Decree 142/2015: an applicant is also a person who «has expressed the wish to apply for that protection», so that the administrative procedure «begins when the applicant expresses his wish to apply for that protection, regardless of the moment at which the application was lodged». Begun on 23 April 2026, the procedure remains subject to the former rules. This is the same reading as Trib. Naples 17179 and Trib. Bologna 13590, here applied not to the suspension of the refusal but to the document owed to the applicant.
The fumus has four elements: from the expression of the wish the foreigner is an applicant (recital 27 of Directive 2013/32/EU); he is entitled to the permit for asylum application or at least to a receipt which, once the time limit for lodging has expired — thirteen working days under Article 26(2-bis) of Legislative Decree 25/2008, counting the extension for the high number of applications — serves as a provisional permit under Article 4(3) of Legislative Decree 142/2015; he is entitled to reception (Article 17 of Directive 2013/33/EU; Article 1(2) of Legislative Decree 142/2015); the procedure is not concluded, the time limit for challenging the rejection still running. The periculum lies in the absence of a document attesting the regularity of his presence: arrest and deprivation of liberty, expulsion, inability to work lawfully and to access reception, the population register and the health service. The same risk of immediate removal justifies the decree without summoning the other party under Article 669-sexies(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure; the confirmation hearing is set for 19 August 2026.
The decree is the first, among those published, to address the Questura's refusal to document the application; it should be read alongside the cases of the attestations of Trento and of Livorno.
Related provisions