UKM/ARD questions

My paternal Great-Grandfather (my father's father's father) was born in London in 1900. My paternal Grandfather was born in the US in 1927. I do not know if my grandfather was ever a British citizen, or, if he was automatically British, if the British government ever knew about him.

My paternal Grandmother was born in London in 1925. She was definitely a British citizen, and had a passport.

My father was born in 1957, and his birth was registered with the British consulate. He has a copy of his British consular birth certificate.

I was born in the US in 1982. (My parents are married, and my mother is not British.)

I cannot find any mention of the concept of "British Citizen by Descent" prior to 1983. I assume that my father would be a Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies, but I am not sure.

Is it possible that I have a path to British citizenship?

Whilst you wait for others to reply, have you tried this?
https://www.gov.uk/check-british-citizen

I saw that, but unfortunately I have to know if I was a citizen before 1983 to know if I am a citizen now.

Probably no, unless your father was in the crown service, recruited in the UK, when you were born.

LDL707 wrote:Is it possible that I have a path to British citizenship?

Well, you do have access to a settlement route (and thus to citizenship) via an 'ancestry visa'.

Richard W wrote:

LDL707 wrote:Is it possible that I have a path to British citizenship?

Well, you do have access to a settlement route (and thus to citizenship) via an 'ancestry visa'.

Those are for Commonwealth citizens. The OP is from the US, so doesn't qualify, unless s/he is a citizen of a Commonwealth country and just didn't mention it in the original post.

My maternal great-grandfather was born in Scotland in 1898. He moved to the United States as a child but did not naturalize until the 1940s.

My grandfather was born in the United States in 1922. It is my understanding that he was automatically a British subject at birth because his father was born in the UK.

My grandmother was born in 1923 in the United States with no ties to the UK whatever.

My grandparents were married in 1947 in the United States. It is my understanding that my grandmother automatically became a British subject upon their marriage.

When the British Nationality Act took effect in 1948, it is my understanding that both of my grandparents became citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies.

My mother was born in 1957. Her father did not register her birth with the consulate, therefore she did not become a CUKC.

My father (whose father was a CUKC by descent and whose mother was a CUKC by birth in the UK) was born in 1957 in the United States, and his birth was registered with the consulate.

My parents were married in 1981 in the United States.

I was born in 1982 in the United States. My birth was not registered with the consulate.

I believe that my mother can now register as a British citizen using form UKM (the theory being that my grandmother, as a CUKC due to her pre-1948 marriage to a British subject, would have automatically been able to pass on her citizenship if women were treated the same as men, or, if it were not automatic, that she would have had the independent ability to register my mother's birth).

I also believe that I am able to register as a British citizen using either form UKM or form ARD, under the theory that my mother, had she not been unfairly denied British citizenship at birth, would have had an independent ability to register my birth with the consulate.

My brother was born in 1987. Under the 1981 law (which took effect in 1983), there was a five year window in which children born abroad to UK citizens could continue to be registered. My brother was born during this window. I believe that he should also have the ability to register, but the guidance on form UKM only says that the registration requirement is to be disregarded for births before 1983, so I'm not sure.

I've read a number of analyses that seem to support my position. But there was a poster on another forum who was quite adamant that I don't qualify. And xxxxxxxx rated my case "unlikely".

Is my understanding of the situation right? Is anybody aware of similar cases?

UKM only works one generation. Citizenship by descent cannot pass on citizenship. Unfortunately I do not think the ARD will work either. It literally gives this as an example of NOT working:

Example 10
Rachel’s grandmother was born in the UK in 1945. Her mother was born in the USA in 1965 and registered as a British citizen under section 4C in 2015, on the basis that she had a UK born mother. Rachel was born in Canada in 1996. Rachel claims that, had the law been different, her mother would have become a British citizen automatically and could have come to the UK when Rachel was a child, allowing Rachel to register as a British citizen under section 3(5) of the British Nationality Act 1981.

Although historical legislative unfairness meant that Rachel’s mother did not become a British citizen automatically, it did not directly prevent Rachel from becoming one. Citizenship could not normally be passed on for more than one generation born abroad, and Rachel would not have been able to become a citizen had women previously been able to pass on citizenship. Whilst she maintains that her mother might have come to the UK had she been a citizen, that relies on hypothetical assumptions. She may be able to apply for a UK Ancestry visa to come to the UK.

The difference between that example and my case is pretty substantial, though. In that example, it depends on the hypothetical of Rachel's mother moving to the UK. In my case, my mother would have only had to register my birth with the consulate. (Before 1983, British citizens by descent could pass citizenship to their children by registering the birth with the UK consulate.)

And, the Home Office guidance (at least for form UKM), says that the registration requirement has to be ignored

Merged the older thread and this thread for a more complete picture of advice already given.

No harm in applying on Form UKM, for which the fees are only £80, which would be refunded fully if the application fails.

However keep in mind that that you are looking at only half the equation. In order for you to become a British citizen in 1983, you'd need both CUKC status and RoA status on 1st January 1983. While there are now both judicial and legislative provisions for disregarding the registration requirements for the inheritance of CUKC on gender discrimination grounds, there is no such provision for RoA, which is limited to two generations outside the UK and which was gender-neutral to start with (i.e. you could claim RoA from any grand-parent born in the UK, if you were a Commonwealth citizen).

Therefore there is a reasonably good chance that your application on Form UKM will fail not because of your CUKC status, which could be remedied under the Romein judgement and more recent legislative enactments, but under the RoA requirement that requires one of your grandparents to have been born, naturalised or registered as a CUKC in the UK (and I do not think that registration of the birth in a British diplomatic outpost counts for this purpose).

To put it another way, hypothetically, if all the relevant parents had registered their children as CUKCs, in 1983, you would have become a British Overseas Citizen (BOC), not a British citizen, as one of your grandparents was not born, naturalised or registered in the UK.

BOC status cannot be acquired after 1983. It can't be inherited except in very rare cases, such as if denying it would lead to statelessness, which does not apply in your case as you are already a US citizen. And Form UKM specifically does not lead to BOC status. It only applies to those to whom both CUKC and RoA would have applied before 1983.

PS: Not sure what ARD is in this context. To me, it is a German TV channel, whose London correspondent became famous for this clip from the dying days of the Truss government (no knowledge of German required. Watch it and you'll see why).

My father's mother was born in London. Would this theoretically be enough, even though the line I'd be using for RoA is different than the line I'd be using for citizenship?

My understanding is that Form ARD is the form for the new historical legislative unfairness route that opened up with the change in the law this year. I think it might be more appropriate for me then UKM, because even if my mother is registered as a British citizen, she wouldn't have been a British citizen at the time of my birth. I think it's a fairly logical argument to say that if my mother was registered as a British citizen late due to gender discrimination, I was impacted by historical legislative unfairness.

Also, has anybody has success with a claim similar to the one that I'm pursuing for my mother? (That is, that her mother became a British subject due to her pre-1948 marriage to a British subject and thus she was able to register as a child of a British mother?) It seems like a somewhat far-fetched theory, but it seems like the law allows it.