24 11. The meaning of the term “real and effective nationality.” Liechtenstein v Guatemala Nottebohm Case (second phase), Judgment of April 6, 1955 : ICJ Reports 1955, p. 4. Issues of nationality and genuine link for people who have multiple citizenships. Summary of facts The petitioner’s submissions Mr. Nottebohm was German by birth and in 1905 he went to Guatemala. He resided and engaged in business in Guatemala. When he left Guatemala, he executed a power of attorney (an official document that gives a person the power to represent another or act on their behalf ) to protect his interests. A period of a little more than a month had passed after the start of the World War II when Mr. Nottebohm applied for naturalization in Liechtenstein. Mr. Nottebohm successfully acquired the nationality of Liechtenstein. After obtaining a Liechtenstein passport, he got a visa and went back to Guatemala in the beginning of the year 1940 where he continued his business activities. The respondents’ submissions In 1943, as part of its war measures, the Government of Guatemala arrested, detained, expelled and refused to readmit Mr. Nottebohm to their territory. They had also seized and retained Mr. Nottebohm’s property without compensating him. Through an application, the Government of Liechtenstein sought compensation from the Government of Guatemala. Against the admissibility of the application by the Government of Liechtenstein, the Government of Guatemala stated that further diplomatic exchanges and negotiations were necessary, that Mr. Nottebohm had through the application of the municipal laws of Liechtenstein been naturalized on October 20, 1939 and gained nationality and that Mr. Nottebohm had not exhausted local remedies before the application was filed. The Government of Guatemala challenged of the naturalization of Mr. Nottebohm and questioned whether it was of international effect. Summary of judgment • The court held that Liechtenstein as a sovereign state could pass legislation about acquisition of nationality in its territory. Nationality served the purpose of ensuring that the person on whom nationality was given enjoyed the rights and was bound by the obligations applicable in the State that gave nationality. It was possible for two states to give nationality to an individual and in such situations conflict could arise. However, in most cases it was only necessary to determine whether the applicant State was entitled to exercise protection for its alleged national. The court held, that preference would be given to the real and effective nationality of the individual and CITIZENSHIP AND NATIONALITY RIGHTS CASE DIGEST