Published: July 29, 2026 | Legal commentary: Avv. Salvatore Aprigliano | Aprigliano International Law Firm

The Italian citizenship minor issue has been fundamentally reshaped by Italian Supreme Court Judgment No. 24045/2026, published on July 26, 2026.

In particular, the Court has overturned the recent restrictive approach and returned to the traditional interpretation: when a child is born abroad to an Italian citizen and also acquires citizenship of the country of birth under jus soli, the child is already an Italian citizen from birth and retains Italian citizenship even if the parent later naturalizes while the child is still a minor. In these cases, the parent’s naturalization during the child’s minority does not interrupt the citizenship line.

This is a highly positive development, however, it is important to distinguish between administrative applications and court proceedings.

Ruling at a glance

Administrative applications: what the ruling does not change

The judgment does not automatically cancel Italian Ministry of the Interior Circular No. 43347 of October 3, 2024, which implemented the previous restrictive interpretation. Therefore, until the Ministry formally withdraws or replaces those instructions, Italian Consulates and Municipalities are likely to continue applying them and therefore to reject Minor Age applications through the administrative route.

Until that happens, consulates remain bound by the existing instructions, which is why the judicial route currently offers the broadest and most reliable protection for clients.

Court proceedings: immediate effect and highest authority

By contrast, in court proceedings, the principle established by the Joint Sections can be relied upon immediately and applied by first-instance and appeal courts. The judgment is not formally binding in the same way as legislation, but a Joint Sections ruling carries the highest precedential authority within the Italian Supreme Court system, coming from the Joint Sections in their nomofilactic function. Consequently, lower courts would therefore need strong and specific reasons to depart from it.

 

Two further points confirmed by the Court

1. Burden of proof. The applicant is only required to prove their line of descent through birth certificates. The burden of proving any interruption of transmission rests with the Ministry of the Interior as the opposing party.

2. Claims filed before the cut-off.  Furthermore, the restrictions introduced in 2025 by the Tajani Decree do not apply to court claims filed before March 27, 2025, which remain governed by the prior legal framework.

The Tajani Decree is not affected

It is essential to clarify that this ruling resolves the specific Italian Citizenship Minor issue, but it does not remove or override the restrictions introduced by the Tajani Decree, which must still be assessed separately in each case.

What about the exclusivity requirement and the CJEU?

For applicants who no longer face the Italian Citizenship Minor Age issue but still encounter the exclusivity requirement under the Tajani Decree, we do not recommend waiting for the Court of Justice of the European Union. Instead, cases can already be filed now with the EU law challenge included from the outset, as the arguments now before the Court of Justice had already been developed by our firm before Order No. 147/2026 was issued, moreover, if the Court of Justice later finds that the retroactive restrictions introduced by the Tajani Decree are incompatible with EU law, pending cases will benefit from that ruling in the same way as all other affected cases, while filing now places the case in a stronger procedural position.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Does the ruling automatically apply at the consulates?

No. For the ruling to take effect at the administrative and consular level, two things would need to happen: Law No. 74/2025 would need to be set aside, and the Ministry of the Interior would need to formally adopt the ruling through a new circular, as it did on October 3, 2024 following the prior Minor Age ruling. Until that happens, consulates remain bound by the existing instructions. For this reason, the judicial route currently offers the broadest and most reliable protection.

2. My application was filed before the cut-off and rejected on Minor Age grounds. What are my options?

In most cases, consular rejection decisions can be challenged before the competent first-instance court at any time, with no filing deadline (the decision always needs to be checked). Since consulates remain fully bound by the Minor Age circular and Law No. 74/2025, and the ruling has not yet been adopted by the Ministry of the Interior, the judicial route is currently the strongest option. Clients whose applications were rejected for the Italian Citizenship Minor Age issue and submitted before March 27, 2025 can benefit from the prior legal framework, which provides broader protection. We therefore recommend proceeding with a court petition against the consular rejection rather than waiting for an administrative reevaluation.

3. When selecting a qualifying lineage for new clients, should we still prioritize a line with no naturalization?

For first- and second-generation applicants, or mixed cases involving second and later generations, we still recommend prioritizing a line where it is possible to obtain a certificate of non-naturalization, so that recognition can be decided directly under the current law. For applicants who fall beyond the second generation regardless, the date of naturalization becomes irrelevant, provided it occurred after the birth of the next child in the line.

4. I still face the exclusivity requirement under the Tajani Decree. Should I wait for the CJEU ruling?

We do not recommend waiting. Cases can already be filed now with the EU law challenge included from the outset, as the arguments now before the Court of Justice had already been developed by our firm before Order No. 147/2026 was issued. If the Court of Justice later finds that the retroactive restrictions introduced by the Tajani Decree are incompatible with EU law, pending cases will benefit from that ruling in the same way as all other affected cases. Waiting for the CJEU ruling does not provide any additional legal protection, while filing places the case in a stronger procedural position should the law change again in the future.

5. I had a consular appointment booked before the cut-off and had to cancel it, or I filed and then withdrew my application, because of the Minor Age issue. Can that be used as evidence?

Yes, and these clients are in a particularly strong position. Following Judgment No. 24045/2026, it is clear that their inability to proceed through the consulate was due to the Minor Age restriction itself, not to any inaction on their part. The cancelled appointment or withdrawn application constitutes compelling evidence of prior intent, and we strongly recommend pursuing a court petition in these cases.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship with Aprigliano International Law Firm. Judgment No. 24045/2026 is a ruling of the Joint Sections of the Court of Cassation and carries the highest nomofilactic authority within the Italian Supreme Court system.  It can be relied upon immediately in judicial proceedings, but it is not formally binding in the way legislation is and it does not, of itself, withdraw or cancel any standing ministerial circular (including Circular No. 43347/2024) or the Tajani Decree restrictions. Individual outcomes depend on the specific facts, documents, and law applicable to each matter.