Article 1(1)(c)
How to follow this case
- Compare your submission date with the date the registry office reported it is reviewing.
- When the publication splits by age or by registration route, the calculation uses the queue matching the option chosen in the form.
- The consultation organises data published by registry offices and keeps it distinct from the details of a specific application.
What this case is
This is the descent route: someone born abroad to a Portuguese father or mother asks for their nationality to be recognised on the basis of that tie. From the registry office's point of view, the application enters a sector of its own and moves in order of submission date, alongside every other application under the same legal basis.
It is also the case with the largest accumulated volume, which explains why the dates published for it are usually further back in the calendar than those of legal bases with fewer submissions.
On this site the case is named in plain language first, with the legal article as the caption. Someone arriving with “Article 1(1)(c)” written on a piece of paper lands on the same page as someone typing “I am the child of a Portuguese citizen”.
Why one article produces several queues
A single legal basis can produce separate publications. The three most common splits here are age group — adults and minors usually appear on separate lines — the registration route, between transcription and direct registration, and the online declaration used in the child's first year of life.
Each of those combinations has its own date and its own pace. Averaging them into one number would look tidier and be less true, so the site keeps the queues separate and shows which one is being used as the reference.
Add the stage to that: “análise no setor” (review within the sector) and “decisão (Conservador de registos)” (decision by the registrar) are published separately, with dates that can be months apart.
How to read the date published for this case
The date a registry office publishes is the submission date of the applications the sector is working on in that reference month — it is not a completion date or a forecast of a decision. When the email says “second half of March 2024”, it is saying the sector has reached the applications submitted in that window.
The comparison this site makes is a subtraction between two dates: the date your application was submitted and the date published for the queue. The result is the distance between them, in months. If the published date has not yet reached yours, there is a gap still to cover; if it has passed, the queue is ahead of your submission. Neither of those two sentences says anything about what happened to a specific application.
Registry offices state that applications are reviewed in order of submission date, within the relevant sector, according to the legal basis invoked. That order is what makes the comparison useful at all — and it is also why picking the wrong queue ruins the result, even with the arithmetic done right.
Where this reading stops being valid
A queue describes a group; you are one case. Document requests, requests for clarification, formal opinions and checks take individual applications out of submission order, and none of that shows up in a queue publication. That is why this site never states that an application is under review, has been decided, or will be completed on a given date.
On top of that, the reference month of the email is already in the past by the time the message arrives, not every queue is published every month, and a redistribution of batches between services can make the published date move backwards. The site shows those gaps and reversals instead of smoothing them over with estimates.
To confirm the actual stage of an application — submitted, under review, awaiting decision or completed — consult the official information from the Instituto dos Registos e do Notariado (IRN).
Common mistakes when reading these dates
- Comparing one registry office's date with another's: they are independent queues, moving at independent speeds.
- Using the adults' queue when the application was filed while the child was still a minor — the age that counts is the age at the date of the application.
- Reading the decision date as if it were the review date, or the other way round. The stage label always sits next to the value.
- Taking “the queue has passed my date” as a conclusion about the application. The queue describes the group, not your case.
Frequently asked questions
Does this page show the status of my application?
No. The page shows the date published for the queue under this legal basis. Confirm the status of a specific application through the relevant official information.
Do minor and adult children share the same queue?
Not always. When the publication splits by age, the comparison uses the queue matching the age reported at the date of the application. When it does not split, both read the same line.
Does the declaration made in the first year of life have its own queue?
In several registry offices, yes: the birth declaration through the online route is usually published on a separate line, with its own date and its own pace.
Why is the date on this page different from one I saw in a group chat?
Most likely because they are different queues. A screenshot with no registry office, no stage and no reference month does not identify the queue it is talking about — and without those three details there is no way to compare the two readings.