Global Caselaw Database on Statelessness
The Global Caselaw Database on Statelessness was established to strengthen access to jurisprudence on nationality, statelessness, and related human rights issues. It provides a practical resource for lawyers, academics, advocates, and decision-makers, complementing UNHCR and the Open Society Justice Initiative’s ‘Litigating the Right to Nationality: A Guide for Practitioners’ by bringing together decisions from courts and tribunals across different jurisdictions.
The database covers judgments that address statelessness directly, such as where the applicant is stateless or at risk of statelessness.
The Global Caselaw Database on Statelessness is an evolving tool and new cases will be added incrementally.
Want to offer feedback or suggest a case for inclusion in the Database? Contact our team
This initiative has been made possible with the support of UNHCR, the European Network on Statelessness, and Mallesons.
16 cases found
-
AS (Guinea) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
Date of decision: 12 October 2018
Region/country: Europe / United Kingdom
The Court determined that a person claiming to be stateless must provide evidence satisfying the standard of balance of probabilities and must apply for nationality as part of that evidence. It did not have to determine whether statelessness was relevant to the revocation of a deportation order because the appellant had not established that he was stateless. In its reasoning, the court held that the…
-
Case of Expelled Dominicans and Haitians v. Dominican Republic
Date of decision: 28 August 2014
Region/country: Americas / Dominican Republic
The Court found that the State had violated the presumed victim’s rights under the Convention, and ordered the State to pay reparations and to take administrative and legislative actions to remediate the presumed victim’s situation and to ensure these violations did not re-occur. Obligation to Prevent Statelessness The Court considered that while States have the power to determine nationality, they must exercise it in accordance…
-
Constitutional Court Decision 6/2015 (II. 25.)
Date of decision: 23 February 2015
Region/country: Europe / Hungary
The Constitutional Court had to decide whether Section 76(1) of the Third-Country Nationals Act was in accordance with the Fundamental Law of Hungary, in particular section Q(2) thereof, and therefore whether it was in line with the 1954 Convention. The Constitutional Court found the judicial initiative to be in part well-founded. It stated that the contested provision primarily affects stateless forced migrants who have never…
-
D.Z. v Netherlands
Date of decision: 20 January 2021
Region/country: Europe / Netherlands
The Committee highlighted that, under Article 24(1), the primary consideration in decisions relating to a minor must be the best interests of the minor concerned as it forms an integral part of every child’s right to measures of protection. The Committee noted that, according to the UNHCR Guidelines on Statelessness No. 4, States must recognise an individual as not having the nationality of a State…
-
Dabetić v. Italy
Date of decision: 18 October 2022
Region/country: Europe / Italy
The Court considered that it was not necessary to address the Government’s objection of non-exhaustion of domestic remedies, as the application was inadmissible in any event, for the following reasons. Referring to the case of Kuric and Others v. Slovenia (no. 26828/06), the Court observed that in the present case the Tribunal of Rome has recognised the Applicant’s status of a stateless person in 2013.…
-
Hoti v Croatia
Date of decision: 26 July 2018
Region/country: Europe / Croatia
The Court found that the Applicant's case did not concern an ‘erasure’ from residence registers, as the evidence showed he lacked a registered residence in Croatia at the time of independence. The Court noted that the Applicant’s case should be distinguished from cases concerning ‘settled migrants’, namely persons who had already been formally granted a right of residence in a host country and where a…
-
Lakatosh & Others v. Russia
Date of decision: 07 June 2011
Region/country: Europe / Russia
The Court received settlement declarations signed by the parties. By the settlement declarations, the parties agreed: the Applicants would waive any further claims against Russia in respect of the facts giving rise to the application; the Russian Government would provide an undertaking to pay each applicant 30,000 euros to cover any pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage as well as costs and expenses; the settlement money would…
-
Nystrom v Australia
Date of decision: 01 September 2011
Region/country: Asia / Australia
Article 12(4) – arbitrary deprivation of right to enter own country The majority of the Committee initially considered the ‘his own country’ requirement, viewing the concept as being broader than ‘country of his nationality’ and inviting consideration of matters such as longstanding residence, close personal and family ties and intentions to remain, as well as the absence of such ties elsewhere. It considered Australia to…
-
Ramadan v Malta
Date of decision: 21 June 2016
Region/country: Europe / Malta
On Admissibility The Court found that the Applicant was not a victim due to a violation of Article 8 regarding the deportation, but he was a victim regarding the revocation of his citizenship. The Court held that ‘an Applicant cannot claim to be the ‘victim’ of a deportation measure if the measure is not enforceable’, which applies ‘in cases where execution of the deportation order…
-
S.N. and E.R. v. North Macedonia
Date of decision: 24 February 2020
Region/country: Europe / North Macedonia
Admissibility The Committee majority considered it was not precluded from considering the communication under Article 4(1) of the Operational Protocol. Therefore, the Committee declared the communication admissible in so far as it raised issues under Article 2(d), 2(f), 12(1), 12(2), 14(2)(b) and 14(2)(h) of the Convention. The dissenting member (Gunnar Bergby) dissented on the basis that the communication should have been found to be inadmissible…
- 1
- 2
Page 1 of 2 for 16 cases
This initiative has been made possible with the support of UNHCR, the European Network on Statelessness, and Mallesons.