Why Union Law Can And Should Protect Stateless Persons 131 residence.109 Unlike in the refugee context, however, a determination of statelessness is important for other reasons as well. First, access to some of the rights set out in the 1961 Convention and the European Convention on Nationality depends on the recognition of statelessness. Further, statelessness may be relevant in private international law disputes. When determining, for example, which country has jurisdiction over a divorce case, or how property can be inherited, the nationality of the individuals involved may play a role.110 Different rules can apply to how one’s name is acquired and changed depending on whether one is stateless or a national of a foreign country.111 Statelessness can therefore be legally relevant in various contexts that go beyond the protection norms enshrined in the international treaties on statelessness. It follows that a procedure by which one can establish his or her status of stateless person should not only be open to those who seek legal residence or protection. For similar reasons, the exclusion grounds of Article 1(2) of the 1954 Con­ vention should not—by contrast to the refugee context and the EU qualification directive—lead to exclusion from the status of stateless person. Whereas the status of refugee has an exclusive meaning in the context of protection, the status of statelessness first and foremost signifies the legal fact of being without a nationality. The issue of whether a stateless person is to be granted protection or residence must be disconnected from the establishment of statelessness. Being a war crimes suspect, or being eligible for protection by other UN agencies than UNHCR, does, and should not, alter the fact of being without a nationality. Therefore, in the context of statelessness determination, the exclusion grounds must be applied with a view to refusing protection and residence to such persons, but without denying recognition of their status. This interpretation is consistent with the wording of Article 1(2) of the 1954 Convention, which excludes certain categories of stateless persons by proclaiming that the Convention ‘shall not apply’ to them, which does not in any way imply that these persons are not stateless.112 109 See sections 6.2 and 6.3 below. 110 See, for example, the Dutch Civil Code, book 10 (Burgerlijk Wetboek Boek 10, Internationaal Privaatrecht), art. 16. 111 See, for example, Judgment of the Dutch Council of State (Raad van State) of 23 July 2014, No. 201310945/1/A3 (ECLI:NL:RVS:2014:2760). 112 Although UNHCR has not specifically addressed the issue of exclusion in the statelessness context, the ‘Handbook on the Protection of Stateless Persons’ indicates that exclusion is only applicable in the context of protection, and not to the establishment of whether a person is to be defined as stateless: UNHCR, Handbook on Protection of Stateless Persons (Geneva, UNHCR, 2014), p. 9, 40. European Journal of Migration and Law 19 (2017) 101–135