Higher Administrative Court of North Rhine-Westphalia - Decision of 25/09/2025 - 19 E 359/25
Overloading authorities is no justification for inaction
In a landmark decision, the Higher Administrative Court of North Rhine-Westphalia has clarified that staff shortages and work overload are not legal grounds for postponing naturalisation procedures indefinitely. The court thus overturned a decision by the Arnsberg Administrative Court, which had suspended the procedure until the end of 2025 because the competent authority was overworked, according to its own statements.
For the applicant, who had already submitted a complete application for naturalisation in February 2024, the decision means that his case must be processed further and a decision made within a reasonable period of time.
Benchmark: Section 75 VwGO and the right to timely legal protection
According to Section 75 VwGO, a person whose application for an administrative act remains undecided for more than three months may bring an action for failure to act - unless there is „sufficient cause“ for the delay.
The OVG NRW emphasised that this paragraph also applies to naturalisation procedures. Despite the reform of the citizenship law in 2024, the legislator had not created a special regulation that would extend the deadline.
This means that, in principle, an action may be brought after three months if no decision has been issued. Neither the Act on the Modernisation of Citizenship Law (StARModG 2024) nor the current Sixth Amendment Act provide for an extension of this deadline for citizenship law.
No „sufficient cause“ for permanent overload
The court made it clear that organisational problems within the authority - such as staff shortages, waves of illness or work overload - are not sufficient justification for unduly delaying proceedings.
Only in exceptional cases can a temporary flood of applications due to a change in the law excuse a short-term delay. However, if the overload persists for years, it is a structural organisational deficit that the administration itself must rectify.
The court formulated clearly:
„If there is not a temporary, but a permanent work overload of the clerks, it is the responsibility of the head of the authority to provide sufficient replacements or to take organisational measures.“
In other words, administrative bottlenecks are not a legal problem for the citizen, but for the administration itself.
Start of the processing period: receipt of the application, not the interview date
Another key point of the decision concerns the start of the time limit in accordance with Section 75 VwGO. The authority had argued that the processing period only began when the applicant appeared in person. The OVG NRW decisively contradicted this view.
The deadline began with the receipt of the written application for naturalisation on 16 February 2024. Naturalisation applications are not subject to any formal requirements and can be submitted informally - a personal appearance is not a legal requirement.
The court thus made it clear that the administration may not artificially delay the processing of an application by linking the start of the deadline to a personal visit.
Permanent overload contradicts the fundamental right to effective legal protection
The OVG NRW emphasised the connection between Section 75 VwGO and Art. 19 para. 4 GG: The right to effective legal protection also includes the state's duty to decide within a reasonable period of time.
It was therefore no longer reasonable to expect an application for naturalisation to be processed for more than 18 months without substantial progress. The delay established by the court violated the citizen's right to timely legal protection.
The court thus emphasised a constitutional principle:
„Effective legal protection means legal protection within a reasonable period of time.“
No apology from other authorities
The defendant municipality had also argued that the verification of the Iraqi passport submitted by the plaintiff was still ongoing because the police had delayed the authenticity check. The court also rejected this argument.
Delays on the part of other authorities in providing assistance must be attributed to the processing authority. It remains responsible for coordinating the process and bringing it to a timely conclusion.
Requirements for „sufficient grounds“ pursuant to Section 75 VwGO
The OVG NRW categorised the case constellation in the existing case law. A sufficient reason could only exist if:
-
documents or acts of co-operation by the applicant are still missing,
-
the situation is particularly complex,
-
or there are exceptional difficulties in establishing the facts.
Not sufficient, however:
-
Staff shortages, holidays or illness,
-
internal organisational problems,
-
ongoing administrative overload.
This line corresponds to the previous case law of other higher courts (see Sächs. OVG, OVG Saarland, OVG Rheinland-Pfalz) and the commentary literature (Eyermann, § 75 Rn. 9).
Significance for naturalisation procedures and administrative law in general
The decision of the OVG NRW has considerable practical relevance - especially in view of the sharp rise in the number of naturalisation applications nationwide since 2024. Many local authorities point to overcrowding as a reason for extending processing times or suspending procedures.
The court draws a clear line here: permanent overload is not a sufficient reason for inactivity. Authorities must react in good time in organisational terms - for example by increasing staff, digitalisation or prioritisation.
The decision also strengthens the rights of applicants: they can file an action for failure to act after just three months if there are no comprehensible reasons for the delay.
No room for legislative interpretation
The OVG expressly stated that the legislator deliberately retained the existing deadlines, although an extension was discussed several times during the legislative process.
Neither the Bundesrat nor the Bundestag have implemented the proposal to extend the blocking period for actions for failure to act in naturalisation procedures to six or twelve months. This means that the three-month period remains unchanged.
The court made it clear that an analogue or „politically motivated“ extension through judicial interpretation would be an inadmissible encroachment on legislative competence.
Conclusion: Administrative standstill is not an option
With its decision of 25 September 2025, the OVG North Rhine-Westphalia sent a clear signal: Overloading does not release the administration from its duty to make a decision within a reasonable period of time.
The decision protects applicants, strengthens the principle of effective legal protection and obliges authorities to adapt their organisation to the reality of increasing numbers of applications.
In practice, this means
-
If you wait longer than three months for a decision, you can take legal action against inactivity.
-
Authorities must treat overload as an internal problem, not as a justification.
-
Naturalisation applicants can expect their procedure to be completed without undue delay.
In short:
The fundamental right to effective legal protection includes the right to a timely decision - and this also applies if the authority has too much to do.
