Venice Court: ruling on citizenship requests (2026)

CATEGORY: Citizenship

CONTENT: The Tribunale di Venezia issued the sentenza n. 20248/2026, published on 30/10/2026, concerning multiple requests for recognition and annotation of Italian citizenship; the case was filed in 2025 and processed over about 22 months, according to the decision text published by Diritto Pratico. According to the decision text by Diritto Pratico.

Summary of the decision and procedural posture

The action was brought by several applicants (names anonymized in the records) for recognition and annotation of Italian citizenship, including a request concerning a person born on 11/08/2024. The Ministry (xxx) appeared contumacious in the process; the judge acted based on arts. 281 undecies/duodecies and 127 ter c.p.c., but the available portion of the publication does not reproduce the final dispositive of the sentence in full. The parties, subsidiarily, framed requests for desapplication of D.L. 36/2025 and of the conversion law L.74/2025 (referred to as Decreto Tajani / L.74/2025) should these provisions impede the recognition sought. The procedural documentation and the adopted rite are described in the decision text, per the link to Diritto Pratico above.

What the court examined (grounds and procedure)

The proceeding followed the rite provided for in arts. 281 undecies/duodecies of the codice di procedura civile, provisions used in actions aimed at declaratory judgments and annotations of civil status and citizenship. Written submissions were filed in substitute of a hearing, and there is no record of a Teams hearing request by the administrative authorities. Regarding the minor born on 11/08/2024, there was specific intervention, with an alternative request: recognition under the former legislation (L.91/1992) or, subsidiarily, a request for inapplicability of the new regime (D.L.36/2025 / L.74/2025). The sentence text, according to Diritto Pratico, details these defensive options raised by the applicants. (source).

Practical implications for Brazilian families

• Timelines: the case shows that judicial proceedings for recognition can proceed for about 1.5 to 2 years (this proceeding ~22 months). For those pursuing the judicial path, this affects travel planning, residence requests, and other civil acts.
• Contumacious Ministry: the figure of Ministry (xxx) contumaz indicates that when the State does not appear, the court may decide based on the file and the evidence produced by the applicants.
• Procedural strategies: it is common to present alternative requests — recognition under L.91/1992 or, subsidiarily, a request for desapplicazione of the Decreto Tajani — when birth occurred after the entry into force of the new decree.
• Practical effects of a favorable ruling: when the judge declares recognition, it is up to the competent Ministry and the ufficio dello stato civile to proceed with the annotation/registration of citizenship and to notify the consulate, enabling the issuance of documents such as the Italian passport.

These insights are relevant for those following topics of Italian Citizenship and practical matters of Life in Italy.

What changes with the Tajani Decree (D.L.36/2025) and L.74/2025 — and what the decision addresses

The D.L.36/2025 (known as the Tajani Decree), as enacted by L.74/2025, introduced significant restrictions to recognition by jus sanguinis. In particular, the consular route was expressly restricted to children and grandchildren, and administrative recognition in the comune for foreign-resident applicants became largely unavailable. These changes markedly limit administrative/consular avenues for citizenship by descent, pushing many claims to the judicial forum.

In the Venezia case, the applicants sought, subsidiarily, the desapplicazione of D.L.36/2025 and L.74/2025, arguing that the new regime could preclude rights previously recognized by L.91/1992. Importantly, the decree has restrictive effects on the substantive right of birth recognition (retroactive application in many cases), which is subject to constitutional and procedural controversy. Proceedings filed BEFORE the Tajani Decree took effect remain protected by the decree’s text; the central dispute is the retroactive application of the new regime to the substantive rights of individuals born outside Italy.

The presence of the desapplicazione request in the process confirms that trial courts continue to be the forum where the compatibility and applicability of the new norms to concrete situations are discussed — especially for births occurring after the decree’s entry into force. Depending on the judge’s view of the regime’s incidence, it is possible to obtain judicial recognition even when the administrative or consular path is barred by the latest regulations.

It is noted that the procedural debate includes sensitive issues of substantive law and retroactivity: the Tajani Decree has restrictive effects that may affect the right to recognition, and judicial challenges typically address desapplicazione of the rule to the case at hand or the protection of rights acquired under L.91/1992.

What to do now (practical steps for citizenship seekers)

1. If you had an administrative denial based on D.L.36/2025 / L.74/2025, consult with an Italian attorney to assess the viability of a court action to seek recognition and, if appropriate, desapplicazione of the regulation.
2. Gather documentary evidence: birth, marriage, and death certificates, properly apostilled and translated by a sworn translator; for minors, include necessary powers of attorney and parental declarations.
3. Plan timelines: consider that lawsuits can take years; organize travel and other plans accordingly.
4. Monitor jurisprudence: decisions from Tribunali and Corte d’Appello on the topic influence strategies; staying informed about similar rulings helps gauge risks and chances.

For related reads, consult our pages on Italian Citizenship and the latest Italy News.

Conclusion The sentenza n. 20248/2026 of the Tribunale di Venezia, published on 30/10/2026, illustrates how litigation over citizenship recognition after D.L.36/2025 and L.74/2025 remains active in first instance, with desapplicazione requests frequently filed as a legal alternative. The case underscores the need for expert counsel, thorough documentation, and monitoring of judicial decisions that may shape jurisprudence on the implementation of the Tajani Decree. According to the decision text published by Diritto Pratico: https://apps.dirittopratico.it/sentenze.html?c=https://apps.dirittopratico.it/sentenza/tribunale/venezia/2026/20248.html#f96d5.