{"id":13374,"date":"2026-04-13T05:45:33","date_gmt":"2026-04-13T05:45:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/?p=13374"},"modified":"2026-04-13T05:45:33","modified_gmt":"2026-04-13T05:45:33","slug":"untaetigkeitsklage-bei-einbuergerung","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.mth-partner.de\/en\/citizenship-objection\/","title":{"rendered":"Inaction lawsuit for naturalisation: When and how to sue"},"content":{"rendered":"

Guide for naturalisation applicants whose application is not being processed by the authority. As of: April 2026<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

Lawyer Helmer Tieben<\/span><\/p>\n

Note: <\/b>This article is for general information only and does not replace individual legal advice. Whether an action for failure to act is advisable in your case depends on the specific circumstances. Seek advice.<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

Two years. Some applicants for citizenship have to wait that long for a decision on their application. Some even longer. Emails to the authorities remain unanswered. No one can be reached by phone. The file is lying somewhere in a pile.<\/span><\/p>\n

Legally, the naturalisation authority has three months to decide on your application. Three months. Not three years. If this period expires without a decision, you have a right: the action for failure to act under Section 75 of the Administrative Court Code (VwGO).<\/span><\/p>\n

This article explains what a claim for failure to act is, when it is admissible, how the procedure works, what it costs, and why in most cases it leads to the authority suddenly making a decision.<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span>A claim for failure to act.<\/b><\/span><\/h1>\n

The action for failure to act is not a separate type of action, but a special form of a claim for performance (\u00a7 42 VwGO). It is filed with the administrative court if an authority does not decide on an application or objection, although it is obliged to do so.<\/span><\/p>\n

In nationality law, this means: You have applied for naturalisation under Section 10 of the Nationality Act (StAG). The authority is not responding. You then file a lawsuit so that the court either obliges the authority to naturalise you (in the case of a claim to naturalisation) or at least forces it to make a decision.<\/span><\/p>\n

The legal basis is \u00a7 75 of the Administrative Courts Code (Verwaltungsgerichtsordnung - VwGO): \u201eIf an objection or an application for the adoption of an administrative act has not been substantively decided within a reasonable period without sufficient reason, the action shall be permissible notwithstanding \u00a7 68.\u201c<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span>Prerequisites: When is the action admissible?<\/b><\/span><\/h1>\n

The action for failure to act has three requirements, all of which must be met:<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span>1. Application made<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

You must have submitted a naturalisation application to the competent authority. The application is informal: it can be made in writing, orally, or by submitting the forms and documents. A mere request for an appointment or placement on a waiting list is not sufficient.<\/span><\/p>\n

Important:<\/b> The SAARLAND Higher Administrative Court has expressly confirmed in 2025\/2026 that the deadline with the <\/span>Receipt of Application<\/b> begins, not only with a later appointment for an interview. Authorities that set the date of the personal appearance as the start of the deadline are acting unlawfully.<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span>3-month period expired<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

The action may be brought at the earliest three months after the application is filed (\u00a7 75 sentence 2 VwGO). According to the case law of the Federal Administrative Court, however, it is not the date on which the action is brought that is decisive, but the date of the court's decision (BVerwGE 23, 135). Therefore, the deadline must have expired by the time the court decides, at the latest.<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span>Start date: When do the three months count from?<\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n

This is one of the most controversial questions. Some authorities claim that the deadline only begins when all documents have been submitted in full or when the applicant has attended in person. This is incorrect.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Weimar Administrative Court has clarified in its order of 11 June 2024 (Ref. 1 K 135\/24 We) that the three-month period begins with the <\/span>Receipt of Application<\/b> at the authorities. If the application is incomplete, the authorities must request missing documents (\u00a7 25 VwVfG). If they do not do so, the deadline still runs. They cannot claim that the application was incomplete if they never raised the incompleteness themselves.<\/span><\/p>\n

The Higher Administrative Court of Saarland (OVG Saarland) has also confirmed in several decisions in 2025 and 2026 (cases nos. 2 E 196\/25, 2 E 181\/25) that the start of the deadline is linked to the receipt of the application, not to a later personal appearance.<\/span><\/p>\n

Therefore, document the day you submitted your application. A receipt confirmation, a registered letter with return receipt, or an online application confirmation will secure your proof.<\/span><\/p>\n

Exception: If there are particularly urgent circumstances, the action may also be brought before the expiry of the three months. This may be considered, for example, if a residence permit is about to expire or if a professional decision depends on naturalisation.<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span>3. No sufficient reason for the delay<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

The authority cannot rely solely on overload or staff shortages. The Higher Administrative Court of M\u00fcnster has clarified that capacity bottlenecks are not a \u201esufficient reason\u201c within the meaning of Section 75 of the Administrative Procedure Act (VwGO). The authority is legally obliged to make a decision within a reasonable period. Organisational problems of the administration do not disadvantage the applicant.<\/span><\/p>\n

Sufficient reasons can include: Missing documents that the authority has requested from you and has not yet received. An ongoing security check by intelligence agencies. Or a particularly complex situation (e.g., an unresolved identity). You can find more information on the requirements for identity verification in our article on <\/span>Identity clarification during naturalisation<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

The crucial point is: if the authority is in a position to make a decision but simply fails to do so, you have the right to take legal action.<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span>Typical example<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

A Turkish national has been living in Cologne for seven years, works as an engineer, has B2 language skills, and has passed the naturalisation test. He will submit his naturalisation application with all supporting documents in January 2025. In April 2025, he inquires about the status. No response. In July 2025, he enquires again. Still nothing. In September 2025, his lawyer serves a notice of inaction. No reaction. In October 2025, an action for failure to act is filed. Three weeks after the lawsuit is served, the authority responds: The application is being processed. Four weeks later, he receives the naturalisation certificate. The authority bears all procedural costs.<\/span><\/p>\n

This pattern repeats. Litigation is rarely a protracted process. It is a signal that compels the authority into action.<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span>Does the three-month period also apply under the new naturalisation law?<\/b><\/span><\/h1>\n

Yes. That is one of the most frequently asked questions. Since the introduction of the Citizenship Law Modernisation Act in June 2024, naturalisation applications have risen sharply. Authorities are overwhelmed, and waiting times are soaring.<\/span><\/p>\n

There were political initiatives to extend the deadline to six or twelve months. This did not happen. Neither the 2024 Modernisation Act nor the Sixth Amendment to the StAG of October 2025 contain a special provision extending the three-month deadline of \u00a7 75 VwGO for naturalisation proceedings.<\/span><\/p>\n

The three-month period still applies unchanged. This also applies to applications submitted after 27 June 2024. You can find an overview of the new regulations in our article on <\/span>new citizenship law<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/span>Before you sue: The escalation stages<\/b><\/span><\/h1>\n

Not every case requires immediate legal action. There are intermediate steps that can lead to the desired outcome faster and more affordably in many cases:<\/span><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Status update request <\/b>I would like to request an update on the processing status of my application. I would appreciate it if you could provide me with this information within two weeks. Please document this request and your response (or lack thereof).<\/span><\/li>\n
  2. Complaint of supervisory oversight <\/b>If the request for an update remains unanswered, you can contact the supervisory authority. This is not a formal appeal in the true sense, but it does create internal pressure. The complaint can be made informally and free of charge.<\/span><\/li>\n
  3. Lawyer's letter of inaction notice: <\/b>A letter from your lawyer, requesting the authority to make a decision within a deadline (e.g., four weeks). At the same time, it announces that an action for failure to act will be filed if the deadline passes without a decision. In our experience, this stage already leads to a decision by the authority in a significant proportion of cases.<\/span><\/li>\n
  4. Action for failure to act <\/b>If all preliminary stages have been unsuccessful, or if the three-month period has already been significantly exceeded, legal action is the next step.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    This tiered approach is not mandatory. You can also sue directly after the three months have expired, without first making an inquiry about the status or Warning letter<\/a> to send. But the preliminary stages are inexpensive, don't take long, and often resolve the problem.<\/span><\/p>\n

    <\/span>Procedure for failure to act action<\/b><\/span><\/h1>\n

    <\/span>Step 1: Documentation<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

    Before you file a lawsuit, you should meticulously document all correspondence with the authority: proof of receipt of the application, requests for status updates, replies (or lack thereof), and any warning letters from your solicitor. These documents form the basis of your statement of claim and provide proof that the authority has indeed remained inactive.<\/span><\/p>\n

    <\/span>Step 2: Filing a lawsuit with the Administrative Court<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

    The action shall be brought in writing before the competent administrative court (\u00a7 81(1) VwGO). The administrative court in whose district the naturalisation authority is located is competent (\u00a7 52 No. 5 VwGO). In Cologne, the Administrative Court of Cologne is competent.<\/span><\/p>\n

    The lawsuit must include: your name and address, the designation of the defendant authority, and the relief sought (a court order to naturalise you or to decide on your naturalisation application). It must be signed by hand (\u00a7 81(1) sentence 1 VwGO). A preliminary procedure (objection procedure) is not required for an action for failure to act. In some federal states, including North Rhine-Westphalia, the preliminary procedure has been abolished for many administrative acts anyway.<\/span><\/p>\n

    There is no compulsory legal representation before the administrative court. Nevertheless, legal representation is advisable, as the wording of the claim and its justification determine success or failure.<\/span><\/p>\n

    <\/span>Step 3: Delivery and authority's response<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

    The court upholds the authority's claim and requests a statement. What happens next depends on the individual case:<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
    Variant<\/b><\/td>\nWhat's happening<\/b><\/td>\nYour situation<\/b><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    1<\/span><\/td>\nThe authority summons you (or issues the requested decision)<\/span><\/td>\nThe claim is declared settled. The authority bears the costs.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    2<\/span><\/td>\nAuthority rejects the application<\/span><\/td>\nThe complaint can be continued as an action for specific performance. The court will review the rejection.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    3<\/span><\/td>\nAuthority cites sufficient reason for delay<\/span><\/td>\nThe court may suspend the proceedings by setting a time limit.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    4<\/span><\/td>\nThe authority isn't responding at all.<\/span><\/td>\nThe court obliges the authority to naturalise (in cases of entitlement to naturalisation) or to make a decision.<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Variant 1 is the most common outcome. The mere fact that a lawsuit has been filed creates enough pressure for the authority to finally act. In Cologne and many other cities, we regularly experience the authority processing the application within a few weeks of the lawsuit being served.<\/span><\/p>\n

    <\/span>What happens following rejection during the process?<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

    Variant 2 deserves special attention. Sometimes the authority reacts to the complaint by rejecting the application. This is not a setback, as you now finally have a decision to appeal against.<\/span><\/p>\n

    You can continue the claim as an ordinary action for performance and ask the court to review the rejection. Alternatively, you can declare the legal dispute settled (the authority bears the costs for the inaction) and proceed with an objection to the rejection. Which path is more sensible depends on the reasons for the rejection.<\/span><\/p>\n

    <\/span>Complaint from the whole family?<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

    If you applied for naturalisation together with your spouse and children, you can file a petition for failure to act for all family members at the same time. The costs increase as a result because the amount in dispute is calculated separately for each person (\u20ac10,000 per applicant). However, the lawsuit is possible for all family members in a single procedure, which limits the effort involved.<\/span><\/p>\n

    <\/span>Challenging a decision or an action for failure to act?<\/b><\/span><\/h1>\n

    With an inaction lawsuit, there are two claims to choose from. The difference is significant and is underestimated by many applicants (and some lawyers).<\/span><\/p>\n

    <\/span>Decision-making complaint: \u201eMake a decision at last!\u201c<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

    You are applying for the court to compel the authority to decide on your application at all. It is up to the authority to decide whether to approve or reject your application. The court is only examining whether the authority has been inactive, not whether you have a right to naturalisation.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Advantage: The reasoning is simpler. You don't have to demonstrate that all naturalisation requirements are met, only that the authority has not made a decision. Disadvantage: The authority can still refuse after the judgment.<\/span><\/p>\n

    <\/span>Action for failure to act: \u201eMake me a citizen!\u201c<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

    You are applying for the court to compel the authority to naturalise you. The court will then examine all substantive requirements (\u00a7 10 StAG) and decide whether you are to be naturalised.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Advantage: You will receive a judgment that forces the authority to naturalise you. Disadvantage: The court will review the eligibility requirements at the time of its decision. If your circumstances have deteriorated in the meantime (job loss, criminal offence, expired residence permit), the lawsuit may fail.<\/span><\/p>\n

    <\/span>What makes more sense?<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

    In the case of naturalisation by entitlement under Section 10 of the Nationality Act (StAG), the action for a declaration of entitlement is the stronger route: the authority has no discretion; if the prerequisites are met, <\/span>must<\/b> The court can force you to become a citizen.<\/span><\/p>\n

    In the case of discretionary naturalisation (\u00a7 8 StAG), the action for a decision is often the more realistic route: the court cannot dictate to the authority how it exercises its discretion, but only that it exercises it at all.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Your solicitor will tailor the application to your specific situation. Often, both legal aims are combined as alternatives: primarily an obligation to naturalise, alternatively an obligation to decide.<\/span><\/p>\n

    <\/span>Costs of an inaction lawsuit<\/b><\/span><\/h1>\n

    The costs are based on the value of the dispute. In naturalisation matters, the value of the dispute is usually \u20ac10,000.<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
    Cost item<\/b><\/td>\nAmount (approx.)<\/b><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Court costs<\/span><\/td>\n798 \u20ac<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Legal fees (RVG)<\/span><\/td>\n1.850 \u20ac<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    Total cost<\/span><\/td>\napprox. \u00a32,650<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

     <\/p>\n

    Indicative costs based on RVG and GKG. Actual costs depend on the course of the proceedings.<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

    <\/span>Who bears the costs?<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

    Herein lies the crucial point: if the authority could have made a decision but did not, it bears the costs. This also applies, according to \u00a7 161 (3) VwGO, if the authority rejects the application after legal action has been filed and you declare the action settled. The authority caused the inaction; it bears the consequences.<\/span><\/p>\n

    This means: If the lawsuit is successful, you will be reimbursed for your court costs and legal fees. The risk of costs for you only exists if the court dismisses the lawsuit, for example, because there was a sufficient reason for the delay or your naturalisation application was substantively unfounded.<\/span><\/p>\n

    <\/span>Legal aid<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n

    If you cannot afford the costs, legal aid (PKH) may be considered under Section 166 of the Administrative Court Rules (VwGO) in conjunction with Sections 114 et seq. of the Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO). Prerequisites: financial need and a sufficient prospect of success for the action. In the case of an action for failure to act, where the authority has obviously not taken action for months, the prospects of success are generally good.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Warning:<\/b> The court costs of \u20ac798 must normally be paid in advance before the court serves the claim. If you are granted legal aid, the advance payment requirement is waived. The legal aid application should therefore be submitted at the same time as the claim. If successful, you will be reimbursed for the costs by the authority, regardless of whether legal aid was granted.<\/span><\/p>\n

    <\/span>When is legal action worthwhile, and when is it not?<\/b><\/span><\/h1>\n

    The action for failure to act is not a panacea. It is a lever. And like any lever, it must be used at the right time.<\/span><\/p>\n

    <\/span>When legal action is sensible<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n