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
-
Johansen v. Denmark
Date of decision: 01 February 2022
Region/country: Europe / Denmark
On Deprivation of Nationality The Court reiterated that while the right to nationality is not guaranteed under the Convention, arbitrary deprivation of nationality may raise issues under Article 8 ECHR because nationality forms part of personal identity. It subsequently applied a two-step test established in previous jurisprudence: whether the revocation was arbitrary, and the consequences for the Applicant. On arbitrariness, the Court found that Section…
-
John K. Modise v Botswana
Date of decision: 06 November 2000
Region/country: Africa / Botswana
The Commission held that the Complainant acquired Botswana citizenship on 30 September 1966 by virtue of Section 20(2) of the Constitution of Botswana in force at the time. The Commission held that the denial of this right was in violation of Articles 3(2) and 5 of the Charter, which provides: ’Every individual shall be entitled to equal protection of the law’. Article 5 on the…
-
JY v Wiener Landesregierung
Date of decision: 18 January 2022
Region/country: Europe / Austria
Addressing the first question, the CJEU began by recalling the judgments in Rottmann (C-135/08) and Tjebbes and Others (C-221/17). It found that situations in which a national of a Member State relinquishes their nationality and is therefore at risk of losing their EU citizenship fall within the ambit of EU law. Unlike the other cases, however, the contested decision itself did not directly result in…
-
K2 v. United Kingdom
Date of decision: 07 February 2017
Region/country: Europe / United Kingdom
The Court addressed the complaint in two parts, first considering the alleged violation of Article 8 and then the alleged violation of Article 14 read together with Article 8. The Article 8 analysis was also divided into two parts, the first on the deprivation of citizenship and the second on the exclusion from the UK. On Deprivation of Citizenship Following its established methodology, the Court…
-
Kennedy Gihana & Others v Republic of Rwanda
Date of decision: 28 November 2019
Region/country: Africa / Rwanda
On Whether the Revocation of the Passports was Arbitrary In assessing whether the revocation of the passports was arbitrary, the Court considered that a revocation must be based on a clear legal basis, serve a legitimate purpose in conformity with international law, be proportionate, and respect procedural guarantees allowing the concerned individuals to challenge the decision before an independent body. While Article 34 of the…
-
Kim v Russia
Date of decision: 17 July 2014
Region/country: Europe / Russia
On Article 3 The Court found that the conditions of detention caused considerable suffering and diminished the Applicant's human dignity. It therefore held there had been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention. On Article 5(4) The Court first noted thatthere was no judicial review in the initial detention order of July 2011. Then the Applicant spent over two years in custody, during which…
-
Kurić and Others v. Slovenia
Date of decision: 26 June 2012
Region/country: Europe / Slovenia
On Preliminary Objections On victim status, the Grand Chamber held that although Slovenia had acknowledged the breach of the Applicants’ rights and issued residence permits to six Applicants, this did not constitute ‘appropriate’ and ‘sufficient’ redress given the ‘widespread human-rights concern created by the ‘erasure’’ and the consequences for these Applicants over a nearly twenty-year period (paragraph 267). The Grand Chamber added that no compensatory…
-
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…
-
Legal Resources Foundation v Zambia
Date of decision: 23 April 2001
Region/country: Africa / Zambia
The Commission considered the rules as potentially depriving the country of potential resources and leadership and also considered, from an individual point of view, being able to vote but not to stand for office. The Commission also considered that there were a number of Zambian citizens whose parents were not born in the Republic of Zambia. This was because before the breakup of the Central…
-
M.G. Tjebbes and Others v. Minister van Buitenlandse Zaken
Date of decision: 12 March 2019
Region/country: Europe / Netherlands
The Court clarified that, since the Applicants had not exercised their right to free movement within the EU, Article 21 TFEU did not need to be considered in its preliminary ruling. Recalling its ruling in Rottmann, the Court subsequent reminded that while Member States have competence to set conditions for acquisition and loss of nationality, this power must be exercised with due regard to EU…
Page 5 of 10 for 100 cases
This initiative has been made possible with the support of UNHCR, the European Network on Statelessness, and Mallesons.