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.
100 cases found
-
Suriani Kempe (President and office bearer of Persatuan Kebajikan Sokongan Keluarga Selangor & Kuala Lumpur (Family Frontiers)) & Ors v Kerajaan Malaysia & Ors
Date of decision: 27 May 2021
Region/country: Asia / Malaysia
On Locus Standi Applying a discretionary and ‘common sense approach’, the Court held the First Plaintiff had a sufficient interest derived from the association’s registered status and the direct impact on its members and family well‑being. Cause of Action The Defendant’s argument that there was no cause of action was said to stem from ‘the belief that the clear words of the constitution leave no…
-
Tebogo Khoza v The Minister of Home Affairs; The Director-General: Department of Home Affairs
Date of decision: 27 February 2023
Region/country: Africa / South Africa
Factual disputes The Court rejected each and every one of the Respondent’s disputes in relation to the evidence of the Applicant on the basis that they are untenable, far-fetched, baseless and ambiguous. Late Registration of Birth: BDRA The Court was satisfied the Applicant substantially complied with the mandatory requirements to be successful with his application for the late registration of his birth. The Court was…
-
TP v Minister of Home Affairs
Date of decision: 22 April 2014
Region/country: Europe / Italy
The Tribunal of Rome held that while TP qualified as an Indian citizen under Indian citizenship law, he was not recognised as such by Indian authorities. The Indian Consulate in Milan refused to recognise his citizenship or issue him a passport, instead issuing a certificate confirming his Tibetan nationality, which prevented him from accessing the rights ordinarily afforded to Indian nationals. The Tribunal found that…
-
Trop v Dulles
Date of decision: 31 March 1958
Region/country: Americas / United States of America
The majority of the Supreme Court determined that Section 401(g) went beyond the scope of the war power, and that it amounted to cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment and was therefore unconstitutional. Regarding the scope of the war power, the Supreme Court considered that Section 401(g) had the purpose of punishing convicted deserters and there was no other ‘legitimate purpose’…
-
Usmanov v Russia
Date of decision: 22 December 2020
Region/country: Europe / Russia
In its analysis, the Court examined the annulment of nationality and the decision to forcibly remove the Applicant from Russian territory separately, as the annulment did not automatically result in removal, and the lower courts examined the issues separately. On the Annulment of Nationality The Court began by outlining its general principles concerning the scope of Article 8, explaining that while the right to ‘private…
-
V.М.А. v Stolichna obshtina, rayon “Pancharevo”
Date of decision: 14 December 2021
Region/country: Europe / Bulgaria
The CJEU first noted the duty of Member States to have due regard for EU law when establishing their national rules relating to the acquisition of citizenship. The Referring Court had accepted that the child had Bulgarian citizenship and under Article 20(1) of the TFEU and is consequently a citizen of the European Union. The CJEU then noted that as a result of the freedom…
-
VG Sigmaringen [Administrative Court of Sigmaringen] A 8 K3735/2018
Date of decision: 07 November 2022
Region/country: Europe / Germany
The Administrative Court of Sigmaringen partly rejected the Plaintiffs' asylum request because they lacked a connection to their presumed country of origin, the Comoros. However, the Court recognised the family's entitlement to a determination of a national prohibition on deportation and found that the BAMF had violated their rights. The Court provided two main reasons for its decision. First, it interpreted ‘poor humanitarian conditions’ resulting…
-
X v. Office of Immigration and Nationality (17.K.32.297/2013)
Date of decision: 23 February 2015
Region/country: Europe / Hungary
The Constitutional Court held that the word ‘lawfully’ in Section 76(1) of the Aliens Act was contrary to the Fundamental Act and annulled it with effect from 30 September 2015. The Court rejected the request to declare a prohibition on application in general or in the individual case. The operative result was that Section 76(1) would remain in force without the word ‘lawfully’, thereby allowing…
-
Yamikani Vusi Chisuse & Others v Director-General, Department of Home Affairs & Another
Date of decision: 22 July 2020
Region/country: Africa / South Africa
The Court unanimously held that the High Court’s orders declaring Section 2(1) of the amended Citizenship Act unconstitutional were not confirmed. The Court in its judgment set out principles of constitutional interpretation in South Africa which included that, where the text of the relevant legislation permits, the legislation should be interpreted in a manner consistent with the Constitution. The Court held that Section 2(1)(b) of…
-
Yasin Omar v. Attorney General
Date of decision: 29 September 2017
Region/country: Africa / Republic of Uganda
The Commission found that the officials from the Ministry of Internal Affairs had breached Article 21 of the 1995 Constitution by rejecting the witnesses’ applications for passports and/or Nationality Identity Cards because of their race and/or characteristics associated with their skin colour. The Commission determined that this was direct discrimination and that evidence of discrimination against multi-racial individuals to be ‘overwhelming’ and ‘alarming’ (page 9).…
Page 10 of 10 for 100 cases
This initiative has been made possible with the support of UNHCR, the European Network on Statelessness, and Mallesons.