Lisbon Dec 16, 2025 — Portugal’s Constitutional Court has delivered an important clarification on how pending nationality applications should be treated when the law changes, rejecting a proposed rule that would have automatically frozen applications under the legal requirements in force at the time they were submitted.
The decision forms part of the Court’s broader ruling declaring several provisions of the new nationality law unconstitutional and provides crucial guidance on the sensitive issue of transitional regimes and the protection of legitimate expectations.
What the rejected rule proposed
One of the provisions reviewed by the Court stated that:
Applications for the attribution or acquisition of nationality that are pending on the date the amended nationality law enters into force should be decided according to the requirements in force on the date of submission of the application, rather than the law in force at the time the decision is taken.
In practical terms, this rule sought to guarantee that applicants would always be assessed under the legal framework that existed when they applied, regardless of later legislative changes.
Why the Court declared it unconstitutional
The Constitutional Court rejected this provision, concluding that it violated the principle of the protection of legitimate expectations, which is inherent in the principle of the rule of law enshrined in Article 2 of the Constitution.
According to the Court’s reasoning, legitimate expectations cannot be protected through a blanket, automatic mechanism that applies indiscriminately to all pending applications. By freezing the applicable law for every pending case, the provision failed to distinguish between different factual situations and removed the possibility of a proportionate and individualized assessment.
The Court emphasized that constitutional protection of legitimate expectations requires:
- A careful balancing of individual reliance interests
- Consideration of the public interest behind legislative change
- Proportionate solutions rather than rigid, mechanical rules
In the Court’s view, the rejected provision undermined the constitutional logic of the rule of law by presuming the existence of legitimate expectations in all pending cases, without allowing for nuance or differentiation.
What remains the general rule
By rejecting this provision, the Court reaffirmed a core principle of Portuguese administrative law:
Nationality applications are, as a rule, decided according to the law in force at the time the decision is made, not automatically according to the law in force at the time of application.
This means that submitting an application under an existing legal regime does not, by itself, create an absolute right to be assessed under that regime if the law subsequently changes.
What the decision does not mean
Importantly, the Court did not deny the relevance of legitimate expectations, nor did it endorse unrestricted retroactive application of new and more restrictive rules.
On the contrary, the Court made clear that:
- Legitimate expectations remain constitutionally protected
- Sudden or disproportionate changes may still be unconstitutional
- Transitional protection may be required in certain circumstances
However, such protection must be provided through a carefully designed transitional regime, not through an automatic freezing of all pending cases.
Implications for future nationality reform
The ruling sends a clear message to lawmakers: if residency requirements for nationality are increased — for example from five to seven or ten years — the legislature must address pending applications with constitutionally sound transitional measures.
These measures may include:
- Protecting applicants who had already completed the required residence period
- Establishing cut-off dates or phased transitions
- Avoiding outcomes that depend solely on administrative delays
Any future reform that ignores these considerations risks renewed constitutional challenge.
The Constitutional Court’s decision brings important clarity to a complex and sensitive issue. While reaffirming that nationality decisions generally follow the law in force at the time of decision, the Court also stressed that fairness, proportionality, and the protection of legitimate expectations must be respected through properly structured transitional regimes.
As the government prepares to revise the nationality law in line with constitutional requirements, the treatment of pending applications will remain one of the most closely watched aspects of the reform.