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
-
Rattigan and Others v. Chief Immigration Officer of Zimbabwe
Date of decision: 13 June 1994
Region/country: Africa / Zimbabwe
Legal Framework and Interpretive Approach The Court considered the language in Section 11 of the Declaration of Rights, which stated that ‘every person in Zimbabwe is entitled to the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual, that is to say, the right whatever his race, tribe, place of origin, political opinions, colour, creed or sex, but subject to respect for the rights and freedoms of…
-
Regina (Begum) v Secretary of State for the Home Department
Date of decision: 26 February 2021
Region/country: Europe / United Kingdom
The Supreme Court held that the Court of Appeal misunderstood the scope of an appeal against a decision of the Secretary of State to refuse a person leave to enter the UK, as the scope is confined to assessing if the decision is in accordance with Section 6 of the Human Rights Act. As Ms Begum did not advance that argument before the Court of…
-
Rexha and Faslliu v. Albania
Date of decision: 29 October 2024
Region/country: Europe / Albania
The Committee considered the Authors’ claims under Articles 17 and 25 insufficiently substantiated and declared them inadmissible. The remaining claims under Articles 16, 24(1–3), and 26 were declared admissible. In its examination of the merits, the Committee began by recalling that every child has the right to special protection according to Article 24, as well as to have their best interests considered. The Committee further…
-
Robert John Penessis v. Tanzania
Date of decision: 28 November 2019
Region/country: Africa / Tanzania
Alleged violation of the Applicant’s right to Tanzanian nationality The Court noted that the Applicant who alleges that he holds a certain nationality bears the onus to prove so. Once he has discharged the duty prima facie, the burden shifts to the Respondent State to prove otherwise. It is against these standards that the Court settled the issue of proof of nationality. The Court noted…
-
Rzecznik Praw Obywatelskich
Date of decision: 24 June 2022
Region/country: Europe / Poland
The CJEU first noted that, under Article 20(1) TFEU, every person holding the nationality of a Member State is a citizen of the Union and, since it is not disputed that S.R.S.-D. has Polish nationality, she enjoys Union citizenship [34]. Article 21(1) TFEU guarantees every citizen of the Union the right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States (paragraphs 35-37).…
-
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…
-
Sadaqat Khan v Chief Election Commissioner
Date of decision: 18 May 2008
Region/country: Asia / Bangladesh
The Court held that the Petitioners were nationals of Bangladesh by birth and residence and therefore entitled to be enrolled as a voter on the electoral roll and receive a National Identity Card. Key to the Court’s finding were the following legislative provisions: Article 6 of the Constitution provided that nationality of Bangladesh shall be determined and regulated by law; Article 2 of the Bangladesh…
-
Secretary of State for the Home Department v Al-Jedda
Date of decision: 09 October 2013
Region/country: Europe / United Kingdom
The Supreme Court initially recalled that the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 (ECHR) does not identify a right to a nationality but it does recognise that the arbitrary denial of nationality may violate the right to respect for private life under Article 8 ECHR (citizen Karassev v Finland). It notes that the UK ratified the Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons (‘the…
-
Secretary of State for the Home Department v E3 and N3
Date of decision: 21 November 2019
Region/country: Europe / United Kingdom
The Court of Appeal allowed the Secretary of State's appeal. The Court found that SIAC had made two legal errors: First, SIAC applied the wrong approach to the burden of proof. The Court held that ‘the burden of proof on the issue of statelessness was on E3 and N3 throughout,’ not on the Secretary of State. Once the Secretary of State had demonstrated that she…
-
Secretary of State for the Home Department v. C B S
Date of decision: 10 January 2020
Region/country: Europe / United Kingdom
The Upper Tribunal upheld the First-tier Tribunal’s decision and affirmed that the discriminatory denial of recognition of nationality and identity documentation can amount to persecution. CBS had established that he was de facto stateless and thus entitled to refugee protection, satisfying the exception to automatic deportation under Section 33 of the UK Borders Act 2007. The Upper Tribunal also clarified the proper use of MA…
Page 8 of 10 for 100 cases
This initiative has been made possible with the support of UNHCR, the European Network on Statelessness, and Mallesons.