THE domicil of persons living under consular jurisdiction in foreign countries presents a problem of unique importance, not only because of the concern which a large number of people have in its proper solution, but also because of its relation to the conception of domicil and to the requisites by which the existence of donricil is to be determined. This problem may be concisely stated in the form of a question as follows: Is it possible for a person residing abroad under consular protection to acquire a domicil of choice in the country of residence? There are no apparent obstacles to the acquisition of such a domicil, and on superficial consideration it would seem that the question might be readily answered in the affirmative. The question has been answered in the affirmative after careful consideration, in the only American cases in which the precise point has been raised. The English courts, on the other hand, seem to be fully committed to the contrary view. The Court of Appeal has decided, in the recent case of Casdagli v. Casdagli, that a British subject cannot acquire a domicil of choice under such circumstances. The conflict of judicial opinion thus presented may be approached most advantageously through a preliminary consideration of the antecedents of the English rule.
Dickinson, Edwin D. (1919-1933). "The Domicil of Persons Residing Abroad under Consular Jurisdiction." Mich. L. Rev. 17, no. 6 (1919): 437-55.