Ukraine - Supreme Administrative Court, judgment no. 813/1774/18

Court name: Supreme Administrative Court
State: Ukraine
Date of decision:
Legal instruments: 1961 Statelessness Convention, 1997 European Convention on Nationality, European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
Key aspects: Burden of proof, Deportation and removal, Deprivation of nationality, Determination/confirmation of nationality, Residence permit, Respect for private and family life

The applicant's Ukrainian nationality was withdrawn rendering him stateless, and subsequently a travel ban of 3 years was imposed on him due to a procedural violation of the border crossing rules. The applicant argued that the travel ban is disproportionate, that he enjoys lawful residence in Ukraine, has very close ties with Ukraine, and that the ban interferes with his right to challenge the deprivation of nationality which rendered him stateless in person in court. 

Luxembourg - Administrative Court, judgment no. 43950C

Court name: Administrative Court of Luxembourg
State: Luxembourg
Date of decision:
Legal instruments: European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
Key aspects: Access to social and economic rights, Burden of proof, Country of return, Deportation and removal, Detention, Determination/confirmation of nationality, Establishing identity, Protection, Residence permit, Standard of proof, State succession, Statelessness and asylum, Statelessness determination

The applicant originates from former Soviet Union, and has lived in Luxembourg since 2004, unsuccessfully applying for the recognition of a statelessness status on numerous occasions. His identity has never been confirmed, and there were doubts as to the credibility of his testimony stemming from his asylum procedures. The applicant claimed that after 15 years of inability to determine the country of destination for his removal the attempts at deportation should be terminated, and his statelessness recognised, especially considering his poor health condition. 

Croatia – High Administrative Court of the Republic of Croatia, judgment no. Usž-1311/20-2

Court name: High Administrative Court of the Republic of Croatia
State: Croatia
Date of decision:
Legal instruments: 1954 Statelessness Convention
Key aspects: Access to social and economic rights, Burden of proof, Determination/confirmation of nationality, Protection, Residence permit, State succession, Statelessness determination

The applicant was born in Croatia in 1998 and has lived there ever since. His parents are citizens of Serbia, but the applicant's citizenship status remained unclear. His request for a permanent residence permit in Croatia was rejected, among others due to lack of a valid travel document, lack of means of subsistence, and lack of health insurance. The Court ordered the authorities to issue a new decision, taking into account the ECHR judgment in Hoti v. Croatia, and the applicant's potential statelessness which is related to widespread difficulties in confirming Serbian citizenship of individuals in a similar situation to the applicant. The applicant initiated a new administrative dispute and the Administrative Court in Rijeka ruled in his favour, however, on appeal, the High Administrative Court rejected the applicant’s request.

Austria - Constitutional Court case of 20 December 2013

Court name: Constitutional Court of Austria (Verfassungsgerichtshof)
State: Austria
Date of decision:
Key aspects: Burden of proof, Country of return, Deprivation of nationality, Determination/confirmation of nationality, Protection, Residence permit, Standard of proof, Stateless status and documentation, Statelessness and asylum, Statelessness determination

Applicant is a refugee from Vietnam, whose refugee status was withdrawn after a number of criminal convictions, combined with the fact that he made a safe trip to Vietnam. He applied for a travel document for foreigners claiming that he is stateless or at least that his nationality status is unclear. The authorities maintained that he was still a Vietnamese national, but the Court sided with the applicant, insisting that the authorities should have taken more factors into account in considering the applicant's potential statelessness. 

Austria - Constitutional Court case of 20 March 2014

Court name: Constitutional Court of Austria (Verfassungsgerichtshof)
State: Austria
Date of decision:
Legal instruments: 1954 Statelessness Convention
Key aspects: Access to social and economic rights, Acquisition of nationality, Determination/confirmation of nationality, Protection, Residence permit, Stateless status and documentation, Statelessness determination

After having been born, having lived, worked and and paid taxes in Austria his whole life the applicant was told he is not entitled to unemployment benefits as he did not have a right to work in Austria. While he was granted Austrian nationality upon application, he argued that he was entitled to unemployment benefits also in the time frame between becoming unemployed and acquiring the nationality, invoking his statelessness, and lack of implementation of Statelessness Conventions by Austria. The Court denies direct applicability of the Statelessness Conventions in Austria, and rules against the applicant. 

Austria - Constitutional Court case of 15 September 2016

Court name: Constitutional Court of Austria (Verfassungsgerichtshof)
State: Austria
Date of decision:
Key aspects: Burden of proof, Determination/confirmation of nationality, Establishing identity, Protection, Residence permit, Standard of proof, Stateless status and documentation, Statelessness and asylum

The applicant was born in Iraq and formerly possessed Iraqi identity documents. After establishing permanent legal residence in Austria he applied for a travel document for foreigners on the basis that he has an "unclear nationality" status. The application was rejected without granting the applicant the right to an oral hearing. The Constitutional Court upheld the applicant's right to have an opportunity to explain his allegedly unclear nationality status in an oral hearing. 

Austria - Constitutional Court case of 30 August 2018

Court name: Constitutional Court of Austria (Verfassungsgerichtshof)
State: Austria
Date of decision:
Key aspects: Burden of proof, Country of return, Deportation and removal, Determination/confirmation of nationality, Establishing identity, Residence permit, Standard of proof, Statelessness and asylum, Statelessness determination

The applicant was born in Armenia and belongs to Yazidis minority. After many years of unlawful residence in Austria, and several unsuccessful attempts to deport him, he applied for a toleration permit, which was refused as he did not cooperate sufficiently with the authorities' attempts to obtain travel documents for him to travel to Armenia, and there is also a possibility he may be a Russian or a Ukrainian national. The Court sided with the applicant, stating that it was the authorities' responsibility to substantiate any presumed links between the applicant and a specific state, before the duty to cooperate could be imposed.

Poland - Supreme Administrative Court, case II OSK 189/07

Court name: Supreme Administrative Court
State: Poland
Date of decision:
Legal instruments: European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
Key aspects: Acquisition of nationality, Birth registration, Childhood statelessness, Deportation and removal, Deprivation of nationality, Determination/confirmation of nationality, Residence permit, Respect for private and family life

The applicant was born in Poland to a Vietnamese mother. When she was 9 years old a Polish citizen formally recognised her as his daughter, and the local authority subsequently confirmed that she is a Polish citizen by birth. She was growing up as a Polish citizen until another 8 years later the central government authorities invalidated the confirmation of nationality by the local authority, as according to the Polish Citizenship Law changes in parenthood can only lead to acquisition of Polish citizenship if they take place within 1 year of birth. The applicant's arguments related to article 8 ECHR, best interests of the child, as well as long-term presumption of Polish citizenship due to no fault of the applicant, although the court dismissed all arguments.

France - Versailles Administrative Court of Appeal, case no. 10VE04202

Court name: Versailles Administrative Court of Appeal
State: France
Date of decision:
Legal instruments: 1954 Statelessness Convention, European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
Key aspects: Burden of proof, Determination/confirmation of nationality, Residence permit, Respect for private and family life, Standard of proof, State succession, Stateless status and documentation, Statelessness determination

The applicant was born in the USSR, on the territory of contemporary Ukraine. He was denied stateless status in France on the basis that he did not make any efforts to get recognised as a national by either Ukraine or Russia. The Court upheld OFPRA's decision, ruling moreover that since the statelessness determination procedure is not aimed at granting residence rights, the applicant cannot rely on potential violations of articles 3 and 8 ECHR in case he is forced to return to Ukraine. 

Russia - Supreme Court of Saha Republic, judgment №33-1261/2013

Court name: Supreme Court of Saha Republic
State: Russian Federation
Date of decision:
Legal instruments: 1997 European Convention on Nationality
Key aspects: Acquisition of nationality, Deprivation of nationality, Determination/confirmation of nationality, Establishing identity, Residence permit, State succession

The applicant is a former USSR citizen, who has been residing on the territory of Russian Federation since 1990. He has received an "insert" into his passport in 1994 as evidence of him being recognised as a Russian citizen, which was a standard procedure at a time. In 2011 a "verification" took place - a policy that resulted in questioning of many citizenships acquired after the fall of the Soviet Union, including the applicant. The Court sided with the applicant, considering among others that refusal to recognise him as a Russian citizen would result in his statelessness. 

Netherlands - Court of the Hague, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2019:7638

Court name: Court of the Hague
State: Netherlands
Date of decision:
Legal instruments: 1961 Statelessness Convention, 1997 European Convention on Nationality
Key aspects: Acquisition of nationality, Childhood statelessness, Determination/confirmation of nationality, Residence permit, Statelessness determination

A child is born in the Netherlands in 2016, and has resided there since, without a legal residence permit. A request was made on behalf of the child to determine that he has Dutch nationality, on the basis of direct application of article 1 of the 1961 Convention, as he would otherwise be stateless. The Court refuses, as it considers this to be a question of granting Dutch nationality, and not of determination of Dutch nationality, which the Court is not empowered to do.

Netherlands - Court of Appeal The Hague, ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2016:1568

Court name: Court of Appeal The Hague
State: Netherlands
Date of decision:
Legal instruments: 1954 Statelessness Convention, European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)
Key aspects: Determination/confirmation of nationality, Residence permit, Stateless status and documentation, Statelessness determination

After twice being denied a residence permit, the applicant initiated civil proceedings against the Dutch state to obtain a declaratory judgment that the applicant is stateless. The District Court of The Hague considers, citing three cases from the European Court of Human Rights, that the determination of statelessness is not a fundamental right under art. 8 ECHR and there is no obligation for the country of residence to determine whether someone is stateless, if foreign authorities (such as the country of origin) refuse to grant nationality or acknowledge the applicant as a citizen. If fundamental rights can be safeguarded through a different procedure, there is no violation of art. 8 ECHR.