Messina Court Recognizes Italian Citizenship by Blood

The Tribunale di Messina recognized Italian citizenship by descent for a family that turned to Italian courts after failing to receive an administrative response within a reasonable timeframe. The decision, sentenza n. 1533/2026, was published on July 21, 2026, and confirms that judicial action remains a recognized path for Brazilians seeking the so-called Italian Citizenship, subject to the new restrictions introduced by Decreto Tajani (DL 36/2025, converted into Lei 74/2025).

What the Messina Court Decided

Ruling no. 1533/2026 was issued in case no. 959/2025 R.G., under the reporting of Judge Francescaromana Puglisi. According to the text of the decision published by Diritto Pratico, the Italian Ministry of Interior formally entered the case but chose not to contest the merit of the claim — that is, it presented no arguments against the citizenship recognition itself.

In practice, this means the Ministry itself left it to the Court to verify the so-called continuità genealogica (continuity of the line of descent) without challenging the existence of the blood tie claimed by the plaintiffs. This stance, frequent when documentation is well-organized, tends to simplify and expedite the court's work.

The case proceeded for approximately 19 months, from filing in 2025 until publication of the ruling in July 2026 — a timeframe in line with what is observed in similar actions filed in Italian courts.

The Family and the Analyzed Line of Descent

According to the text of the ruling, the plaintiffs proved they descend from an Italian ancestor who emigrated abroad and who, at no time, renounced Italian citizenship nor naturalized in the destination country — an essential requirement for maintaining the right to jure sanguinis.

The decision reconstructs, generation by generation, the line of descent through birth and marriage certificates, until reaching the current applicants who now live abroad. One particular point of the case drew attention: one of the plaintiffs was recognized by the father outside of marriage, a situation that also needed to be analyzed by the court within the genealogical continuity required by Italian law. The Court deemed that this recognition does not break the chain of transmission of citizenship, provided it is properly proven by adequate documentation.

Why Italian Courts Accepted to Hear the Case Without Prior Administrative Proceedings

One of the central points of the ruling is the reaffirmation that delays and uncertainty in Italian consulates and the Ministry of Interior itself when analyzing citizenship applications justify direct recourse to judicial action, without needing to wait indefinitely for an administrative response.

The Messina Court cites already-established case law, such as decisions by Tribunale di Roma from 2022, which treat long administrative waiting queues as a kind of tacit refusal, capable of authorizing the filing of a judicial action. This understanding is relevant because it reinforces that descendants do not need to wait years for a consular response to pursue their rights directly in Italian courts — a path detailed in How Italian Citizenship Judicial Action Works.

What Territorial Jurisdiction Criterion Was Used

Another important technical aspect of the decision concerns territorial jurisdiction. Since the Cartabia Reform (Lei 206/2021), which altered article 4 of Decreto-Lei 13/2017, when the action's plaintiff resides abroad, jurisdiction to judge requests for recognition of Italian citizenship became exclusive to Tribunale di Roma, no longer defined by the birthplace of the Italian ancestor, as was previously the case.

This point is especially relevant for Brazilian descendants, as centralization in Rome brought uniformity of case law, but also concentrated the volume of cases in a single court, which impacts deadlines and procedural strategy. Cases judged by other courts, such as Messina, concern specific situations or predate the consolidation of this rule, and should not be taken as a general example of current territorial jurisdiction.

What This Decision Means in Practice for Brazilian Families

Ruling no. 1533/2026 reinforces that, despite the scenario of queues and long waits both in Brazilian and Italian consulates, the judicial route remains a recognized path to obtain recognition of Italian citizenship, within the limits imposed by current legislation.

The absence of merit contestation by the Ministry of Interior, as occurred in this case, is common when genealogical documentation is well-organized and the line of descent is clear — which tends to accelerate recognition by the Court. This reinforces the importance of investing time and care in the stage of searching for certificates in Italy before filing any action.

On the other hand, families considering this path need to be aware of the new scenario brought by Decreto Tajani, converted into Lei 74/2025, which restricted the consular route to children and grandchildren of Italians and brought a relevant controversy about retroactivity: the decree declares that anyone born outside Italy who is not a child or grandchild of an Italian would never have been considered Italian, retroacting to the person's own birth. This issue is currently under analysis by the Sezioni Unite of Corte di Cassazione, whose decisions have binding force for all Italian judges. The changes, explained in detail in Decreto Tajani and Lei 74/2025: What Changes for Descendants, make it even more important to seek updated legal guidance before deciding which path to follow — administrative or judicial.

Cases such as the one ruled on by Tribunale di Messina show that Italian courts remain a concrete alternative for those with consistent documentation and facing consular system delays, though subject to new legal restrictions. To follow other decisions and changes affecting the topic, it is worthwhile to regularly consult Italy News and content about Life in Italy published by Raízes Italianas.

Do you want to know if you are entitled to Italian citizenship? Talk to a specialized legal advisor.