Venice Court Confirms Jurisdiction and Applicable Law (ruling)

The Venice Court sentence (no. 18351/2026), published on 07/10/2026, confirmed the forum's jurisdiction and applied the pre-reform regime (Law n. 91/1992) in a collective petition for recognition of c citizenship by jure sanguinis filed in 2024. The Ministry of the Interior did not participate in the proceedings — it was declared contumaz — and the decision held that the petition should be judged by the court of the Italian ancestor's place of birth.

Summary of the decision — Tribunale di Venezia, Italian citizenship

The Venice Court sentence no. 18351/2026, published on 07/10/2026, ruled on a collective request for recognition of Italian citizenship by descent. The process was filed in 2024 and proceeded for about 33 months; the main hearing was noted on 28/09/2026, with the parties submitting written briefs in lieu of an oral appearance. According to the decision text published by Diritto Pratico, the Court noted that the Ministry of the Interior had been notified but did not present a defense, being declared contumacious. The Court declared its competence as it concerns the birthplace of the Italian grandfather and found the pre-reform regime (Law n.91/1992) applicable, given that the petition was filed before the effective date of DL 36/2025 (converted into Law 74/2025). Source: Diritto Pratico — https://apps.dirittopratico.it/sentenze.html?c=https://apps.dirittopratico.it/sentenza/tribunale/venezia/2026/18351.html#44514.

Relevant legal grounds — judicial jurisdiction and Law 74/2025

The Court based its declaration of jurisdiction on changes in law and established interpretation regarding forum determination when the applicant resides abroad. Specifically, the decision cites the provision that ties the action to the birthplace of the Italian ancestor for cases involving residents outside Italy, thereby justifying the Tribunale di Venezia's competence to review the petition filed by descendants.

Regarding the applicable law, the Court distinguished between the petition date and the reform's effective date (DL 36/2025, converted into Law 74/2025). Since the petition was filed before the reform took effect, the judge applied the prior regime — Law n.91/1992 — to assess the eligibility requirements for recognition by descent. The court’s understanding, as recorded, respects acts and petitions submitted before the legislative change, maintaining examination under the rules in force at the time of filing. Source: decision text published by Diritto Pratico.

"The petition was filed before the reform took effect; therefore, the prior provisions apply" — per excerpt from the sentence text published by Diritto Pratico.

The process also recorded the involvement of a party born before 28/03/2025 (the date identified as the reform's effective date) and confirmed that notification to the Ministry occurred, though no defense was submitted by the Ministry.

What this means in practice for Brazilians seeking jure sanguinis citizenship

• Requests filed before the reform’s effective date (identified in the ruling as 28/03/2025) continue to be evaluated under the old rules (Law 91/1992). This matters for cases started in 2024 and early 2025, as the eligibility analysis will follow the prior regime.
• Jurisdiction can vary: for applicants residing abroad, the action may be heard by the court of the birth municipality of the Italian ancestor, rather than the court at the applicant’s residence in Brazil. This can alter the venue and competent forum for the claim.
• The declaration of contumacy of the Ministry (absence of defense) is procedurally significant and may speed up the decision, but does not automatically guarantee grant of the petition; the judge remains bound by evidence and applicable law. For general guidance on the citizenship process, see our section Cittadinanza Italiana.

Deadlines and proofs families should observe

• Gather documents proving the line of ascendance and the ancestor’s naturalization status (birth, marriage, and death certificates; naturalization certificates or consular clearance certificates). Demonstrating that the ancestor did not naturalize before the descendant’s birth is central under Law 91/1992.
• Be mindful of interveners: minors or other descendants can intervene in the proceedings, and intervention must be formalized per procedural rules. The ruling shows that interventions can be recorded even without a specific hearing.
• A change in jurisdiction to the birthplace of the ancestor may require travel to Italy or hiring a local attorney to monitor the process — check costs and timelines with a qualified professional in Italian law.
• For general guidance and news on the topic, visit our coverage in Notícias da Italia and Vida na Itália.

Impacts of the Tajani Decree (DL 36/2025 / L.74/2025) cited by the decision

The Venice Court ruling confirms that for petitions filed before the reform’s effective date, the prior regime continues to apply: the reform was not applied retroactively to previously filed petitions, according to the court’s understanding in that case. Conversely, for petitions filed after Law 74/2025 came into effect, the new rules and limitations introduced by the converted decree must be observed, per the legislation and official guidance.

The decision reinforces the need to check the petition date when assessing which legal regime will apply, and highlights that issues of jurisdiction — particularly for those residing abroad — remain relevant in strategic planning for those seeking recognition by descent.

In conclusion, sentence no. 18351/2026 of the Tribunale di Venezia reaffirms that petitions started before 28/03/2025 are evaluated under Law 91/1992 and illustrates how forum determination can fall to the court of the birthplace of the Italian ancestor, with practical implications for travel and legal representation. Primary source: decision text published by Diritto Pratico — https://apps.dirittopratico.it/sentenze.html?c=https://apps.dirittopratico.it/sentenza/tribunale/venezia/2026/18351.html#44514.