Tribunale di Venezia Recognizes Citizenship by Descent (iure sanguinis)

AVISO IMPORTANTE: this article has been updated to include the impact of the Tajani Decree (DL 36/2025, converted into Law 74/2025) and the risks of material retroactivity. Read the caveats carefully — the practical effect of any recognition ruling depends on the applicant's generation and relevant dates.

The Tribunale di Venezia recognized Italian citizenship iure sanguinis in a ruling published on 14/10/2026, affirming the transmission line and determining that the administration did not prove loss of the right, according to the decision text published by Diritto Pratico (sentenza n. 18905/2026; process filed in 2025; estimated duration: about 21 months). Source: Diritto Pratico — https://apps.dirittopratico.it/sentenze.html?c=https://apps.dirittopratico.it/sentenza/tribunale/venezia/2026/18905.html#2cff2

Summary of the decision

• The case was decided by the Tribunale di Venezia — sentenza n. 18905/2026, published on 14/10/2026. Process filed in 2025; estimated duration: 21 months. (Source: Diritto Pratico.)
• The action was a petition for riconoscimento di cittadinanza per discendenza (iure sanguinis) brought by ### and others against the Ministry, which appeared amministrazione contumace.
• The court recognized transmission of citizenship by ancestry and applied the principle that citizenship status is permanent and imprescriptible, with the burden on the defendant (the administration) to prove any loss of citizenship — evidence not presented by the Ministry, according to the text of the decision published by Diritto Pratico.

Main legal grounds

• The decision rested on longstanding Italian citizenship doctrine, citing historical norms applicable ratione temporis, such as the Codice civile (1865), the Legge 555/1912 and the Legge 91/1992.

  "The matter of citizenship falls within the jurisdiction, and the law is established judicially when the administration does not provide proof of any possible loss." (in line with the text of the decision published by Diritto Pratico)

• The court’s rule on burden of proof: the applicant must demonstrate the filiazione and the acquisition fact (birth of the Italian ancestor); if the administration claims loss (e.g., naturalization of the ancestor abroad), the State must provide proof of that interrupting act. In this case, the administration did not produce sufficient evidence.
• The court reiterated that citizenship matters are jurisdictional, i.e., appropriate for judge review, and that judicial remedy is legitimate even in the absence of a prior administrative act.

FUNDAMENTAL RAISE ABOUT THE CURRENT LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK (Tajani Decree)

• Since 2025, the Tajani Decree (DL 36/2025, converted into Law 74/2025) has significantly altered the landscape for recognition of citizenship by descent in administrative and consular practice.
• Key points to consider when interpreting this ruling:
  • The Tajani Decree restricted administrative recognition in municipalities and via consular channels: consular processing is limited to children and grandchildren of Italian citizens; later generations (e.g., great-grandchildren) can no longer obtain automatic consular recognition under the new law. (General rule: consular route limited to figli and nipoti.)
  • The Decree has material retroactivity effects defined by its text: it states that certain foreign-born individuals who are not figli or nipoti were not Italian citizens, thereby retroactively extinguishing a right they might have invoked. This is a change in material law, not merely procedural.
  • The practical consequence is that the reach and effectiveness of a judicial recognition ruling depend on the applicant’s generation and the concrete applicability of Tajani to their material right. If applicants are figli or nipoti, the situation and practical effects differ from later generations.
• IMPORTANT: cases filed before Tajani’s entry into force enjoy the protection stated in the Decree itself. It is thus essential to verify the exact filing date and the applicable text to the individual case.

What this means in practice for Brazilian families

• The decision confirms that the judicial route remains a viable path to obtain recognition when the transmission line is documented and the administration fails to prove loss. However, the practical effect of the ruling on registrations/transcriptions and document issuance requires case-specific analysis:
  • If applicants are children or grandchildren of Italians, the ruling generally allows enforcement and annotation in registri; still, one must assess Tajani’s impact on the concrete case.
  • If applicants are great-grandchildren or later generations, it is essential to assess whether Tajani declares, from a material standpoint, that these people were never Italian — in this scenario, the ruling’s practical effectiveness may be blocked by later legal grounds. This is a delicate issue requiring precise legal review.
• The contumacy of the administration benefits the applicant in the burden of proof, but does not eliminate the need to verify whether, in light of the current legal framework (DL 36/2025 / Law 74/2025), the applicant’s material right remains recognizable.

Deadlines and practical effects after the ruling

• The court decision makes the citizenship status recognized within the process; typically, one should pursue the esecuzione della sentenza to obtain registrations/transcriptions in the Italian civil registries. However, due to 2025 legislative changes, registration/transcription and document issuance may require additional procedures or face hurdles if Tajani’s application is decisive for the applicant’s material right.
• The ruling’s text may invoke historical norms, but any interpretation of its practical effects must consider Tajani’s material retroactivity and the rule on retroactivity. In other words: a favorable ruling does not automatically guarantee that the Comune or the consulate will proceed with annotation without examination of conformity with the new legal framework.
• If the administration does not comply voluntarily, executive measures can be taken; however, a preliminary legal review is recommended to assess risks of administrative opposition grounded in Tajani.

How to use this decision in your case

• Gather Italian and Brazilian certificates proving the ascending line: birth, marriage, and death certificates, plus records showing no naturalization of the ancestor or, if any, the date of that naturalization.
• Carefully verify:
  • the generation to which the applicant belongs (figlio, nipote, bis-nipote or later);
  • the filing date relative to Tajani’s entry into force;
  • whether there is any administrative or judicial documentation on the ancestor’s naturalization.
• Consult a qualified attorney to act in the competent section. The Tribunale di Venezia decision is notable as a point of reference, but after Tajani, its practical usefulness depends on factual elements and analysis of material retroactivity in the specific case.

Conclusion The sentenza n. 18905/2026 of the Tribunale di Venezia (14/10/2026), published and analyzed by Diritto Pratico, reaffirm that judicial recognition of Italian citizenship by descent remains a viable route when the transmission line is documented and the administration cannot prove loss. However, with Tajani in force since 2025, which restricts administrative/consular avenues and declares material retroactivity effects that may block recognition for later generations than figli and nipoti, each case requires individualized verification and specialized legal counsel.