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
-
Sentenza n. 4262/2015
Date of decision: 04 November 2014
Region/country: Europe / Italy
The Supreme Court began by reaffirming that statelessness determination must go beyond formal nationality requirements and consider an applicant’s overall situation. It also recalled the 1954 Convention and Italian legislative provisions (Article 1 of the Consolidated Immigration Act; Legislative Decrees 25/2008 and 251/2007), which guarantee stateless persons the same fundamental rights as foreigners and direct access to ordinary courts, underscoring their constitutional importance. The Court…
-
Sessions, Attorney General v Morales-Santana
Date of decision: 12 June 2017
Region/country: Americas / United States of America
The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals’ decision that the Equal Protection Principle had been violated but it overturned the Court of Appeals’ remedy finding. The majority opinion was written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and was joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, Justice Anthony Kennedy, Justice Stephen Breyer, Justice Sonia Sotomayor and Justice Elena Kagan. The Supreme Court determined that the different physical…
-
Shoygo v. Ukraine
Date of decision: 30 September 2021
Region/country: Europe / Ukraine
The Court noted the challenge faced by the Ukrainian authorities in organising the expulsion of the applicant due to the lack of identity documents. However, it observed that ‘no explanation has been provided for why it took the authorities, who knew about the applicant’s affirmations concerning his Russian nationality from the outset of his detention [...], almost eleven months to contact the Embassy of the…
-
Sisojeva and Others v. Latvia
Date of decision: 15 January 2007
Region/country: Europe / Latvia
The Grand Chamber’s assessment proceeded from the Chamber's 2005 judgment, which had found a violation of Article 8. The Court began by emphasising the subsidiary nature of the Convention system and addressed the Applicants’ claim that domestic law governing the Applicants’ residence entitlements had been wrongly applied. It reiterated that its role under Article 19 of the Convention is limited to ensuring compliance with the…
-
Smirnova v Russia
Date of decision: 24 October 2003
Region/country: Europe / Russia
Article 5 (Right to Liberty and Security): The interpretation of Article 5 emphasizes the protection of individual liberty and the necessity for judicial scrutiny of detention practices to ensure compliance with human rights standards. Article 5 guarantees the right to liberty and security of person. The Court found that there had been violations of Article 5 §§ 1 and 3 regarding the applicants' repeated remand…
-
Stewart v Canada
Date of decision: 01 November 1996
Region/country: Americas / Canada
Admissibility The Committee found the claims under Arts 7 and 9 inadmissible as the author had not substantiated his claim that deportation would amount to cruel or inhuman treatment or that it would violate his right to liberty and security. The Committee also found the claim under Art 13 inadmissible as the deportation was ordered pursuant to a decision adopted in accordance with law and…
-
Sudita Keita v. Hungary
Date of decision: 12 May 2020
Region/country: Europe / Hungary
The Court applied the general principles established in Hoti v Croatia(application no. 63311/14). The Court cited in paragraphs 119-123 of that case (paragraph 31). The Court began by establishing that “the principal question to be examined…is whether, having regard to the circumstances as a whole, the Hungarian authorities, pursuant to Article 8, provided an effective and accessible procedure or a combination of procedures enabling the…
-
Supreme Administrative Court, Case II OPS 1/19
Date of decision: 02 December 2019
Region/country: Europe / Poland
The Supreme Administrative Court recalled the dominant position in legal literature, which is that transcription is not in itself a registration, it is a declaratory act that merely reproduces and copies a foreign civil status record. It does not have any constitutive effect. As a rule, an act submitted for transcription is only verified with regards to determination of paternity. The law does not provide…
-
Supreme Administrative Court, Case II OSK 2552/16
Date of decision: 10 October 2018
Region/country: Europe / Poland
Without questioning the validity of the application of the public order clause, the Supreme Administrative Court noted that the concept of public order as a justification for a deviation from the basic rule of transcription should be interpreted narrowly, considering carefully the specificities of each case under consideration and assessing the seriousness of actual threats to one or more of the fundamental interests of society.…
-
Supreme Court, Judgment no. Kfv.II.37.715/2021/6
Date of decision: 25 May 2022
Region/country: Europe / Hungary
The Supreme Court ruled in favour of the Applicant. It held that ‘statelessness that is rooted in practice also corresponds to the definition of statelessness’ as in Hungarian law and the 1954 Convention (page 37). The Supreme Court noted that the burden of proof should be shared according to Hungarian law. As the procedure was initiated at his request, the Applicant should have provided any…
Page 9 of 10 for 100 cases
This initiative has been made possible with the support of UNHCR, the European Network on Statelessness, and Mallesons.