Brazilian Courts Rule Against Italian Citizenship Firms

The Brazilian judicial system has become a new stage for disputes involving the Italian citizenship process. Recent rulings in Mato Grosso do Sul, São Paulo, Paraná, and Bahia have ordered consulting firms to compensate clients for failures in handling their cases and for not delivering results promised under contract.

What the Mato Grosso do Sul court decided

The 6th Civil Court of Campo Grande ordered a Italian Citizenship consulting firm to reimburse a client R$32,700 paid for services and to pay an additional R$15,000 in damages for emotional distress. The case centered on a service contracted to obtain recognition of citizenship by descent, which included locating documents belonging to the Italian ancestor.

According to the ruling, the client traveled to Italy to move the process forward without the ancestor's birth certificate having actually been located — a document essential to supporting the application before Italian authorities. Without that certificate, the process could not proceed as promised.

In the judge's assessment, the firm had taken on an obligation of result toward the client, not merely an obligation of best efforts. This means that, upon hiring the service, the consumer had a legitimate expectation of obtaining recognition of citizenship, not just that the firm would "try" to locate the necessary documents. This legal distinction was central to the ruling.

Failures identified in the ruling

The Campo Grande decision listed a series of failures in how the service was provided. One stood out: the client was only informed that Italian authorities had rejected his application two years after the fact — not until 2021. This delay in communication was one of the factors that weighed into the damages awarded.

In its defense, the firm argued that the Covid-19 pandemic had delayed the process. The judge rejected this argument, however, finding that the documentation problem — the failure to locate the ancestor's birth certificate — predated the start of the pandemic. In other words, the failure already existed before any health restrictions that might have justified the delay.

The judge classified the relationship between client and firm under the terms of Brazil's Consumer Protection Code, which brought important practical consequences to the case. One of these was the reversal of the burden of proof: instead of the client having to prove that the firm had failed, it fell to the firm itself to demonstrate that it had properly fulfilled its contractual obligations — which, according to the ruling, it did not.

Other cases in Brazil show a body of case law still taking shape

The Mato Grosso do Sul case is not isolated. In a 2023 ruling, the São Paulo Court of Appeals (TJSP) had already found, in a similar situation, that a citizenship consulting firm had taken on an obligation of result toward its client, ordering the firm to pay damages for failing to deliver the contracted service.

The Paraná Court of Appeals (TJPR), meanwhile, addressed a similar case from a different angle, classifying the relationship as an obligation of best efforts — meaning it found that the firm was required to use its best efforts, without necessarily guaranteeing the final outcome. Even so, the Paraná court ordered reimbursement of amounts paid by the client after finding failures in how the service was provided.

In Bahia, a consulting firm was also ordered to pay damages, in a ruling that pointed to failures in the information provided to the client and a lack of proper documentation of the actions taken during the process. The case reinforces a pattern that has already appeared in different states across the country: clients turning to the Brazilian courts to recover funds and seek compensation when contracted services do not match what was promised.

This body of rulings shows that Brazilian case law on the subject is still taking shape, with courts adopting different interpretations of the nature of the obligation assumed by consulting firms — whether it is one of best efforts or of result. This distinction has a direct impact on the type of liability that can be assigned to firms in each case.

What this means for Brazilians of Italian descent

It is important for readers to understand the limits of these rulings. Brazilian courts have no authority to rule on the right to Italian citizenship itself — that is a matter governed by Italian law and reviewed by Italian authorities and courts. What Brazilian courts are ruling on are the contracts signed in Brazil between clients and consulting firms, and the way those services were delivered.

In practice, these rulings reinforce the need for transparency on the part of the firms hired and for documented proof of each stage of the process — from locating certificates to filing applications with the relevant authorities. For those researching their Italian ancestry and considering hiring professional support, these recent cases serve as a warning about the importance of clear contracts, well-defined timelines, and ongoing communication about the progress of the case.

Those following this topic can find more information about the recognition process at Italian Citizenship, as well as updates on judicial and administrative decisions in Italy at News from Italy. For those who have already obtained recognition and are planning to move, the site also offers content on Life in Italy.

Among the services frequently hired by descendants is certificate research in Italy, a step that, as recent court cases show, requires careful oversight and documentation of every step taken.

The rulings examined here point to a trend of greater scrutiny by Brazilian courts over consumer relationships in the Italian citizenship consulting market, at a time when demand for recognition of Italian citizenship remains high among Brazilians of Italian descent.

Want to know if you're eligible for Italian citizenship? Talk to a firm specialized in Italian citizenship consulting.

Source: Insieme