France - Council of State, 9 November 2007, n° 261305

Court name: Conseil d'État
State: France
Date of decision:
Legal instruments: 1954 Statelessness Convention, European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
Key aspects: Childhood statelessness, Deportation and removal, Respect for private and family life

The removal of the parent of a stateless child who is not entitled to a residence permit can only be ordered for reasons of national security or public order. Otherwise, the removal of the parent would deprive the child of the rights and guarantees attached to the status of stateless person if the child accompanies his or her parents outside French territory in application of the removal order issued against the parents, or would disproportionately infringe on the right to family life of the parents, in breach of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, if the child remains in France separated from his or her parents.

United Kingdom - JM & R v The Secretary of State for the Home Department

Court name: Court of Appeal (Civil Division)
State: United Kingdom
Date of decision:
Legal instruments: 1954 Statelessness Convention
Key aspects: Acquisition of nationality, Childhood statelessness, Deportation and removal, Stateless status and documentation, Statelessness determination

The appellant, a child born to a Zimbabwean mother and Portuguese father, was not a recognised national of any country and consequently applied for limited leave to remain in the United Kingdom through paragraph 405 of the Immigration Rules. However, for paragraph 405 of the Immigration Rules to apply, individuals must also satisfy the conditions of paragraph 403, which include a requirement that individuals be inadmissible to any country other than the UK. The Court of Appeal affirmed the Upper Tribunal’s decision that JM was admissible to Zimbabwe and therefore did not qualify for limited leave to remain in the country under paragraph 405.

CRC - A.M. (on behalf of M.K.A.H.) v. Switzerland (no 95/2019)

Court name: Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC)
State: Switzerland
Date of decision:
Legal instruments: 1954 Statelessness Convention, 1997 European Convention on Nationality, Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), European Union law
Key aspects: Access to social and economic rights, Childhood statelessness, Country of return, Discrimination, Procedural safeguards, Refugee status determination, Statelessness and asylum

The communication concerned M.K.A.H., a stateless child, and whether Switzerland violated his rights under Articles 2 (2), 6, 7, 16, 22, 24, 27, 28, 29, 37 and 39 UNCRC when it decided to return him and his mother to Bulgaria, pursuant to the agreement between Switzerland and Bulgaria relating to the readmission of migrants in irregular situations, where they had previously obtained subsidiary protection.

Some of the findings of the Committee were that (i) Switzerland had not respected the best interests of the child nor heard him at the time of hearing the asylum request; (ii) the child ran a real risk of being subject to inhuman and degrading treatment in case of a return to Bulgaria; (iii) Switzerland had not sought to take the necessary measures to verify whether the child would be able to acquire a nationality in Bulgaria. The Committee also found that Article 7 UNCRC implicates that States must take the necessary positive actions to implement the right to acquire a nationality.

Switzerland - Federal Administrative Court, judgment no. F-6147/2015

Court name: Federal Administrative Court (Bundesverwaltungsgericht)
State: Switzerland
Date of decision:
Legal instruments: 1954 Statelessness Convention
Key aspects: Access to social and economic rights, Burden of proof, Childhood statelessness, Determination/confirmation of nationality, Exclusion grounds, Protection, Stateless status and documentation, Statelessness and asylum, Statelessness determination

Applicants requested to be recognised as stateless in addition to having already been recognised as refugees. The judgments deals with the question of whether refugee status is comparable in rights to the status of nationals within the meaning of the exclusion clause in Article 1(2) of the 1954 Convention. The Court sides with the applicants confirming their right to be recognised as stateless persons in addition to having been granted asylum-based residence status. 

Austria - Constitutional Court case of 6 March 2014

Court name: Constitutional Court of Austria (Verfassungsgerichtshof)
State: Austria
Date of decision:
Legal instruments: 1954 Statelessness Convention, European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
Key aspects: Burden of proof, Childhood statelessness, Country of return, Deportation and removal, Protection, Residence permit, State succession, Statelessness determination

The applicant is of Roma ethnic origin, with parents from former Yugoslavia, who was born, grew up, and worked his whole life in Austria. He has had a permanent residence permit until 1995, when the latter was withdrawn due to applicant's criminal convictions. The Court found the applicant to be stateless, and determined that expulsion of a stateless person without a former country of habitual residence amounts to violation of Article 3 ECHR. 

France - Nantes Administrative Court of Appeal, case no. 14NT01490

Court name: Nantes Administrative Court of Appeal
State: France
Date of decision:
Legal instruments: 1954 Statelessness Convention
Key aspects: Birth registration, Burden of proof, Childhood statelessness, Standard of proof, Statelessness determination

The applicant was born in Taiwan, and entered France as an unaccompanied minor on a "borrowed" passport. Her application for stateless status was rejected, as she did not make sufficient effort to obtain Chinese nationality. OFPRA also relied on the applicant having had a "double identity" in France and therefore being untrustworthy, and on the fact that France does not recognise Taiwan as an independent state.