When naturalised, do they revoke your ILTR?

[Docterror]

if its invalidity didn't show up on any of the systems that were consulted when he was travelling, then I guess it would be assumed by everyone to be valid. It seems as if it might have shown up on the IND/BIA system when he came to re-enter the UK, however

How would the invalidity of a passport that does not have a physical stamp cancelling it be recognised by the BIA system? Do Indian consulates send the info to the HO about all the citizens that lose their citizenship?

[Christophe]

How would the invalidity of a passport that does not have a physical stamp cancelling it be recognised by the BIA system? Do Indian consulates send the info to the HO about all the citizens that lose their citizenship?

Don't know that that would happen. But the BIA would, presumably, know that the holder had become a British citizen and that the ILR was, therefore, no longer valid. That is the most likely reason for the holder being delayed, I think. (If that fact were known, it would be known - by extension - that the passport was no longer valid on account of Indian nationality law (although I'm not sure that BIA officers would be as "extended" as all that!). But as we don't know that exact basis on which this passport holder was taken to task, it's all speculation really...

[SYH]

How would the invalidity of a passport that does not have a physical stamp cancelling it be recognised by the BIA system? Do Indian consulates send the info to the HO about all the citizens that lose their citizenship?

Don't know that that would happen. But the BIA would, presumably, know that the holder had become a British citizen and that the ILR was, therefore, no longer valid. That is the most likely reason for the holder being delayed, I think. (If that fact were known, it would be known - by extension - that the passport was no longer valid on account of Indian nationality law (although I'm not sure that BIA officers would be as "extended" as all that!). But as we don't know that exact basis on which this passport holder was taken to task, it's all speculation really...

The passport has to do with one's nationality the ILR is proof of permission to enter the country, the expiration of the permission doesn't invalidate the passport so stop saying that.

[Rambo]

Most likely he simply stated that he was a British citizen anyway. I always get asked the question ' on what grounds did you get the ILR ?' by the IO.

If he is not white, most likely they will ask about the ILR sticker and its history.

If I was travelling on my other passport and was again questioned by the IO about my ILR sticker I would state that I was a British citizen to avoid any problems.

[maveli62]

interesting read

http://www.cmcn.ab.ca/britishpassport.php

[Docterror]

How would the invalidity of a passport that does not have a physical stamp cancelling it be recognised by the BIA system? Do Indian consulates send the info to the HO about all the citizens that lose their citizenship?

Don't know that that would happen. But the BIA would, presumably, know that the holder had become a British citizen and that the ILR was, therefore, no longer valid. That is the most likely reason for the holder being delayed, I think. (If that fact were known, it would be known - by extension - that the passport was no longer valid on account of Indian nationality law (although I'm not sure that BIA officers would be as "extended" as all that!). But as we don't know that exact basis on which this passport holder was taken to task, it's all speculation really...

While I do agree it could be all speculation, there is a possibility that the person in question just happened to end up with an IO who happened to know that Indians with ILR stop to be Indians after being granted BC. Many IOs do get confused even with the finer deatils of UK laws and I would be surprised if they were aware of annulment details of Indian nationality.

[Christophe]

The passport has to do with one's nationality the ILR is proof of permission to enter the country, the expiration of the permission doesn't invalidate the passport so stop saying that.

Yes, that's right about the ILR. But the point I'm making about the passport is that, in the case of Indian citizens - for example - it becomes invalid when the holder is naturalised as a British citizen because at that moment the holder ceases to be an Indian citizen. A person is not entitled to hold an Indian passport if he or she is not an Indian citizen and so the passport is therefore not a vaild document for travel. As such, it shouldn't be used, and the fact that it might not have been physically cancelled doesn't alter its invalidity. (That has nothing to do with the ILR endorsement or any other endorsement.)

In the case of a nationality that is not lost on acquiring another citizenship, of course the passport remains vaild, even though the British endorsement in it might not be.

[SYH]

The passport has to do with one's nationality the ILR is proof of permission to enter the country, the expiration of the permission doesn't invalidate the passport so stop saying that.

Yes, that's right about the ILR. But the point I'm making about the passport is that, in the case of Indian citizens - for example - it becomes invalid when the holder is naturalised as a British citizen because at that moment the holder ceases to be an Indian citizen. A person is not entitled to hold an Indian passport if he or she is not an Indian citizen and so the passport is therefore not a vaild document for travel. As such, it shouldn't be used, and the fact that it might not have been physically cancelled doesn't alter its invalidity. (That has nothing to do with the ILR endorsement or any other endorsement.)

In the case of a nationality that is not lost on acquiring another citizenship, of course the passport remains vaild, even though the British endorsement in it might not be.

Yes I got that point but the Indian passport may have not been invalidated yet, it does take time for the authorities to catch up. Plus I don't see how the British Immigration would know just by looking at it if it was?

[Christophe]

Yes I got that point but the Indian passport may have not been invalidated yet, it does take time for the authorities to catch up. Plus I don't see how the British Immigration would know just by looking at it if it was?

The Indian passport doesn't need to be actively "invalidated" by the authorities to be invalid: it is invalid the moment that an Indian citizen naturalises as (e.g.) British.

British Immigration might or might know. If they were smart and knew about Indian immigraiton law, they would know that a naturalised British citizen could not be an Indian citizen too. I doubt, however, that in reality they're quite that smart...

[SYH]

Yes I got that point but the Indian passport may have not been invalidated yet, it does take time for the authorities to catch up. Plus I don't see how the British Immigration would know just by looking at it if it was?

The Indian passport doesn't need to be actively "invalidated" by the authorities to be invalid: it is invalid the moment that an Indian citizen naturalises as (e.g.) British.

British Immigration might or might know. If they were smart and knew about Indian immigraiton law, they would know that a naturalised British citizen could not be an Indian citizen too. I doubt, however, that in reality they're quite that smart...

We are going in circles. I know it doesn't have to be actively invalidated to not be valid. My point is that he was given a hard time at the border and I am saying it is unlikely that it was because they knew it was invalid.

[Christophe]

We are going in circles. I know it doesn't have to be actively invalidated to not be valid. My point is that he was given a hard time at the border and I am saying it is unlikely that it was because they knew it was invalid.

Yes we are. And as we don't know the discussion at passport control, we'll never know what the basis of it was, probably.