## Facts

- The United States filed a claim against Italy on behalf of Albert Flegenheimer under Articles 78 and 83 of the 1947 Treaty of Peace with Italy, seeking relief tied to alleged forced disposal of his shares in an Italian company in March 1941.
- Italy raised a preliminary objection that the claim was inadmissible because Flegenheimer was not a U.S. national (and thus not a “United Nations national”) on the dates required by Article 78(9)(a): September 3, 1943, and September 15, 1947.
- Flegenheimer was born in Germany in 1890. His father had been naturalized in the United States in 1873, later returned to Germany, and was naturalized there in 1894.
- In the 1930s, as a Jew, Flegenheimer fled persecution, moving through several countries; in 1940, a Nazi decree deprived him of German nationality.
- While in Canada, he sought U.S. citizenship recognition, which U.S. authorities then denied.
- In 1942, while in the United States on a visa, the U.S. government recognized him as a U.S. citizen by birth; in 1952 it issued him a certificate of nationality, which the United States argued was sufficient proof.
- The Italian–U.S. Conciliation Commission considered only the admissibility objection and did not reach the merits of whether the 1941 share sale was invalid due to duress or discriminatory measures.

## Issues

1. Whether Flegenheimer was a U.S. national, and therefore a “United Nations national” under Article 78(9)(a), on both September 3, 1943 and September 15, 1947, making the claim admissible.
2. Whether the Commission was bound to accept a U.S. certificate of nationality as conclusive, or could assess its probative value and the underlying facts and law.
3. What legal framework governed the nationality inquiry (including domestic nationality law, relevant treaty rules, and general international law concepts such as effectivity and estoppel).

## Decision

- The Commission sustained Italy’s preliminary objection and held the U.S. petition inadmissible.
- The Commission held it had competence to examine nationality as a preliminary question where jurisdiction depended on the claimant’s status under the Peace Treaty.
- The Commission ruled that a nationality certificate was relevant evidence but not automatically conclusive in an international proceeding; the tribunal could evaluate its probative value.
- The Commission found the United States did not establish that Flegenheimer possessed U.S. nationality on both treaty-critical dates.
- Because the claim was inadmissible, the Commission did not decide the substantive property/duress allegations.

## Legal Principles

- An international tribunal may inquire into an individual’s nationality when nationality is a jurisdictional condition under the applicable treaty.
- A unilateral certificate or administrative determination of nationality is not necessarily binding on an international tribunal; its weight depends on the evidence and applicable law.
- Treaty-based claims requiring nationality at specified dates impose an objective, date-specific, and continuous-status burden on the claimant state.
- Considerations of equality of parties support a tribunal’s ability to scrutinize nationality evidence offered by one party to establish jurisdiction.
- Concepts associated with effectivity and estoppel may be considered, but they do not compel acceptance of unilateral nationality assertions that conflict with treaty conditions or are insufficiently supported.

## Conclusion

The Commission dismissed the U.S. claim as inadmissible because the United States failed to prove that Albert Flegenheimer was a U.S. national on both dates required by the Peace Treaty, and it confirmed that international tribunals may review the evidentiary value of nationality certificates when nationality is a threshold condition for jurisdiction.


Flegenheimer (U.S. v. Italy), 14 R.I.A.A. 327 (It.-U.S. Conciliation Comm’n 1958)