Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
No.aakashbasu2 wrote: ↑Mon May 07, 2018 6:45 pmmy question is that if I first directly apply for a British passport, but the home office concludes that the evidence submitted is insufficient to establish that my parents were married, would it in any way hurt my chances of subsequently registering as a british citizen instead?
Hi, thanks for your comment. I understand the clause you are referring to regarding subsequent marriage legitimizing the child, provided the local law of the land the father is domicile in at the time of my birth (in my case, India) permits such legitimization. I have searched the Indian Marriage Act thoroughly and there is no concept of legitimization, although the "Legitimization and Domicile" document published by the Home Office (https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... micile.pdf) says that in India, subsequent marriage legitimizes a child as long as both parents' names are on the birth certificate. I have no idea where the home office got this from, but if so, then I should be fine.Obie wrote: ↑Mon May 07, 2018 8:41 pmIf your parents were subsequently married then you are a British by virtue of section 2(1). I disagree that you will need to be registered in those circumstance.
If an anytime after your birth, your parent contracted a lawful marriage, then you are a British.
Provided of course the marriage or registration of it took place before the 01-07-2006.
Section 47 of the British Nationality act 1981, which dealt with children legitimised by the subsequent marriage of their parents, ceased to have effect from 1st July 2006.
Thanks for your reply! My mother's passport issued in 1989 mentions "name of husband" as my father, as do several of her official documents all issued from quite some time back (before 2007, but none issued before I was born). In addition, following the procedure for late marriage registration in India, my parents are indeed obtaining a marriage certificate right now, which will mention their actual date of marriage (in 1983), but of course the registration date will be very recent. I also have their original wedding ceremony invitation card which mentions date of marriage and other details, though I don't know what weight this would carry. Given this, I am actually wondering if it will just be a waste of money to try to directly apply for a passport, or whether to just forget that possibility and go for registration directly. I would appreciate any thoughts.secret.simon wrote: ↑Tue May 08, 2018 3:30 amSection 47 of the British Nationality act 1981, which dealt with children legitimised by the subsequent marriage of their parents, ceased to have effect from 1st July 2006.
The usage of the husband's surname would not constitute proof of marriage. After all, that could be done by deed poll or the appropriate procedure for changing name. Concrete legal proof from the relevant organisation officiating at the wedding (the government registrar or priest, if documentation is maintained by the church/religious organisation) would be required.
I know for a fact that my parents were married at the time of my birth, but I am not sure I have the required evidence to prove it, because their marriage was not registered then (it was registered 35 years late). Hence, instead of spending time sending tenuous circumstantial evidence, I wanted to avoid it altogether and simply register as a british citizen. The law says that I can register if "had my parents been married, I would have become a british citizen". It does not mention there is a specific requirement that my parents were not married. Do you think I should still first try to directly apply for a passport, and wait till it is refused before registering?
Hi! Thank you, and I totally understand what you mean. I just want to know if I am obligated to first check whether they will accept whatever slim evidence I have of my parents marriage by first attempting to directly apply for a passport. I would prefer however to not even bother trying to prove that my parents were married, and instead go for registration as a British citizen using form UKF.
I know, but I don't want to go through all this trouble of trying to prove that my parents marriage was valid even though it was not registered. I ideally want to avoid the whole question altogether and just apply for registration as a British citizen using form UKF. So, like I said before, the real question is do I have an obligation to first attempt to provide whatever tenuous evidence of parents's marriage I have, or can I totally avoid the question of parents marriage by directly applying via UKF.
That's not true. If you follow the references cited to justify removing Section 47 from the text displayed, you will find that the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 Section 162(5) only caused Section 47 to 'have no effect' for children born on or after 1st July 2006. (The date was established by the statutory instrument commencing the section.)