Legitimacy and Brit Passport

My son has applied for his Brit passport. He was born in Oct 1982 in Australia. His father was born in the UK to UK parents. We we unmarried at the time of his birth, but subsequently married 4 years later. We are still married.
His fathers name appears on his birth cert issued at the time of his birth.
However,
I was previously married and divorced in December 1981 - making it 10 months from when I was divorced to when our son was born.
The British passport application was filled out as normal, after a month were were asked to supply further information and documents, all of which were supplied.
It has now been a month since the the last lot of documents were sent. I called the Brit Embassy in Canberra today and was told that as the application was not straightforward, the documentation has been sent to the UK for approval.
Does anyone have any experience with anything like this or any idea if the passport will be issued and anyone have any idea how long it will take. Trying to get information out of the call centre is very difficult, and very expensive. Not to mention stressful - today I was bawling like a baby talking to them, and I am not usually a sook!
As my son is now in the UK it is getting urgent that the passport arrives. Would it do him any good to approach the passport office in the UK? And if so, who does he call over there?
Any info would be greatly appreciated.

I'm not sure why it's taking so long but I would imagine the fact that the child was illegitimate is the issue.

UKBAbble wrote:I'm not sure why it's taking so long but I would imagine the fact that the child was illegitimate is the issue.

It is not the issue because they got married later on.

There are some complexities with the legitimacy law but I have never seen them affect cases where the father is domiciled in either the United Kingdom or Australia.

There have been quite a few bad reports about the British High Commission in Canberra passport office (ignorance of nationality law, poor service levels etc).

From the sketchy information I have received it would appear that under British law, if the mother is married the father of any child born during the substience of the marriage is deemed to be the husband.
Now heres the rub: I was not legally married to my former husband at the time of my sons conception or birth.
The embassy has my original decree nisi from the Australian Family Court that proves that I was divorced 10 months before this birth.
And also, I have discovered that the substience of the marriage is not necessarily from the day you married until the day you divorced, but the time you actually lived together as a married couple. Under Australian law, you cannot divorce until you have been legally separated for 1 year. I wish the embassy would do their math.
My present husband (the said childs biological father AND named on the birth certificate as his father) have been together for over 28 years. I suspect that a request for a DNA test is coming. Is this possible or likely, does anyone know?
We have answered every question truthfully and supplied every original documents that has been requested.

LittleMo wrote:From the sketchy information I have received it would appear that under British law, if the mother is married the father of any child born during the substience of the marriage is deemed to be the husband.
Now heres the rub: I was not legally married to my former husband at the time of my sons conception or birth.
The embassy has my original decree nisi from the Australian Family Court that proves that I was divorced 10 months before this birth.
And also, I have discovered that the substience of the marriage is not necessarily from the day you married until the day you divorced, but the time you actually lived together as a married couple. Under Australian law, you cannot divorce until you have been legally separated for 1 year. I wish the embassy would do their math.
My present husband (the said childs biological father AND named on the birth certificate as his father) have been together for over 28 years. I suspect that a request for a DNA test is coming. Is this possible or likely, does anyone know?
We have answered every question truthfully and supplied every original documents that has been requested.

If you were legally married after the child was born and husband is shown as father on birth certificate, there should normally be no problem.

You may wish to browse the document "LEGITIMACY" in the Home Office Nationality Instructions.

http://www.bia.homeoffice.gov.uk/siteco ... ec2gensec/

Thanks so much for you advice.

I am happy to report that I had confirmation from the Embassy in Canberra that the passports have been approved and are awaiting printing and we should have them by next week.

I am so relieved. I will certainly sleep tonight! And I will feel even better when we have them in our hands.

LittleMo wrote:Thanks so much for you advice.

I am happy to report that I had confirmation from the Embassy in Canberra that the passports have been approved and are awaiting printing and we should have them by next week.

I am so relieved. I will certainly sleep tonight! And I will feel even better when we have them in our hands.

Good news.

As the passports will be the only proof of British citizenship (bar making a new application from scratch) then take good care of them, keep copies separate and do not throw them out when expired.

Is there more than one child involved (passports?).

Also, is son aware of the distinction between being British "by descent" (which he is) and "otherwise than by descent"?

Is there more than one child involved (passports?).

Also, is son aware of the distinction between being British "by descent" (which he is) and "otherwise than by descent"?

I will be treating these passports like gold. I already plan to scan them as soon as I have them.
We have another son who was born in 1988. I was not too concerned about his application as he was born 3 years after we got married. But I was still wondering why both applications were held up. I thought that the younger one would have been issued as a matter of course.
Can you please explain the difference between the two - "by descent" and 'otherwise than by descent'
One of the reasons I am over the moon is that (as far as I am aware) under the current rules, their children will be eligible for an ancestry visa, at the very least. Am I correct here? I should add, neither of them have any children at the moment.
And also while I am here, am I also correct in thinking that I would be eligible for an ancestry visa, as my grandmother was English? Not that I will ever want or need one, just curious.