top of page
Search

Is Your Naturalization Application in Berlin Stuck? When an Untätigkeitsklage Makes Sense

Fiona Macdonald
1 day ago
6 min read

In 2025, 2,265 actions for failure to act in citizenship matters reached the Verwaltungsgericht (administrative court) Berlin, up from 1,662 in 2024, according to the court’s annual report of 30 January 2026. Since 1 January 2024, the Landesamt für Einwanderung (LEA, the state immigration office) has been Berlin’s central naturalization authority. An Untätigkeitsklage under § 75 VwGO makes sense once your file is complete, the delay is on the office’s side and the wait has clearly become unreasonable. It is the legal means to push the LEA to a decision, but it guarantees neither a decision by a particular date nor a positive one.

What the LEA itself says about processing

The LEA’s naturalization FAQ (as of 1 August 2025) states that it cannot answer status inquiries (Sachstandsanfragen) on pending applications. It took over more than 40,000 open cases from the district offices, has since received up to 1,000 online applications a week, and gives no forecast for when the older cases will be finished.

Files are not decided strictly in order of receipt. The LEA seemingly works on old and new applications in parallel and gives weight to whether a file is ready for decision. Documents generally must not be older than six months (test and language certificates excepted), so a file that has waited long often needs updates, such as recent payslips. On 8 June 2026 the Senate told the Berlin parliament that the LEA sets no target processing times and does not record average processing times.

What takes time in a naturalization file

Some steps are outside the LEA’s hands. Under § 37 StAG, the office sends the data of every applicant aged 16 or over to the domestic intelligence services (Verfassungsschutz) to check for grounds for exclusion; the Senate added in August 2025 that it also queries the security authorities and the Federal Central Criminal Register. A pending criminal investigation goes further: § 12a Abs. 3 StAG requires the office to suspend the decision until the proceedings end, and after a conviction until the judgment is final. That is a statutory reason for the delay, and an action will not change it.

The rest is often on your end. Answer every request for documents promptly and in full, and keep the PDF confirmation the online application generates.

How the Berlin court has dealt with these actions

The court’s figures reach the public through the Senate’s answers to written questions in the Abgeordnetenhaus (Berlin state parliament). Pending actions for failure to act in naturalization matters rose from 681 on 30 June 2024 to 1,143 on 31 May 2026, and nine chambers handled citizenship law in 2025. Of the 106 such actions concluded in 2023, one was dismissed, 13 were withdrawn and 92 ended in some other uncontested way; the statistics do not record why.

Filing does not move your file to the front. Asked whether cases with a pending action are brought forward, the Senate answered no in February 2025. What the action adds is a court that can set the LEA a deadline and, without a sufficient reason for the delay, order it to grant the application or to decide on it.

Decisions from other states show how courts weigh time. The Higher Administrative Court of North Rhine-Westphalia (OVG NRW) held on 17 September 2025 that years-long overload is no sufficient reason and that about 20 months for a naturalization is no longer acceptable. The Administrative Court of Trier (VG Trier) found in December 2025 that, given the complexity of naturalization, up to one year in total can generally be justified, and that a delay in the security check caused by the temporary surge in applications after the 2024 reform was a sufficient reason. Neither binds the Berlin court, and much depends on the stage your file has reached.

Costs and repealed rules

Under § 161 Abs. 3 VwGO, if the LEA decides only after you have sued and you then end the case, it bears the costs, provided you could expect a decision before you filed. Courts apply the law in force when they decide, so an action does not preserve the former three-year fast track under § 10 Abs. 3 StAG, repealed with effect from 30 October 2025. According to the Senate, the Berlin court upheld the LEA’s practice of refusing these applications, even those filed before the repeal, in an interim-relief decision of 26 May 2026 (VG 39 L 209/26).

Before you file against the LEA

An action is strongest when the chronology is clean. Have these ready:

  • the PDF confirmation of your online application and its date

  • every request from the LEA and the date you answered it

  • any message sent through the LEA’s contact form and any reply

  • anything that makes the delay costly, such as a job offer or a planned move abroad

A complaint to the supervisory unit at the Senate Department for the Interior and Sport, or a petition to the Abgeordnetenhaus, is a separate channel. Neither obliges the LEA to decide by a particular date.

When to get a lawyer

Advice makes sense once your file has been complete for several months without a decision, and sooner if a job or a move depends on German citizenship. A lawyer can request inspection of the electronic naturalization file through the LEA’s digital form and see whether the office is still waiting for anything. That shows whether the wait is already unreasonable, whether the LEA has a sufficient reason, and whether an action is worth bringing now.

Move a Berlin naturalization file toward a decision

Fiona Macdonald advises on delayed naturalization applications at the LEA, from reviewing the file to an action for failure to act at the Verwaltungsgericht Berlin, which she files at a flat fee. Fiona Macdonald advises clients anywhere in Germany and internationally by video.

Related reading

Sources

Cover image: Szczecinolog, CC BY 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons (cropped).

Last reviewed: October 2026 — RAin Fiona Macdonald

This article reflects information available at the review date above and may not remain current as rules and practice change. It is general information only, not legal advice, and does not create a lawyer–client relationship. Liability for reliance on its contents is excluded to the extent permitted by law.

© 2026 Fiona Macdonald Rechtsanwältin

​

Imprint

bottom of page