Immigrationboards.com

Hi all,
I am looking for your advise for my husband. I have had a number of different opinions.
My background:
1. Iraqi Kurd - arrived to the UK in 1999
2. Rejected application 2003
3. Received 3 years discretionary leave 2004
4. 2007 applied for ILR
5. 2008 acknowledge as a legacy case
6. March 2010 granted ILR

Can I apply for naturalization now or do I have to wait for 12 months?

Many thanks

Petana

Is spouse a British citizen?

No, wife has got permanent residence permit ( EEA3)

You will have to wait 12 months from the date you were granted ILR.

Antother thing, between 2003-2004,due have a prove that you were resident here in the UK legally? (i.e appeal...etc), if not then I am afraid that some would argue you might have to wait 5 years rather that 12 months, by the way, I am Iraqi kurd and in a similar position, I hope it is just 12 months.

If he applied for ILR in 2007 before his discretionary leave expired, then his stay would be regarded as legal.

mrlookforward wrote:If he applied for ILR in 2007 before his discretionary leave expired, then his stay would be regarded as legal.

Yes I agree with you in this point, but he mentioned that his applcation was refused in 2003, and DLR was granted in 2004, this is why I am asking about his legal situation between 2003 and 2004. If he was appealing at that time, then he should be entitle for BC in 12 months. I have to say all these might change if a new goverment was elected.

mrlookforward wrote:If he applied for ILR in 2007 before his discretionary leave expired, then his stay would be regarded as legal.

Hiya, thanks. Yes, he applied for ILR before his DL expired.

When his application was rejected in 2003 he appealed and was granted DL in 2004.

Petana wrote:

mrlookforward wrote:If he applied for ILR in 2007 before his discretionary leave expired, then his stay would be regarded as legal.

Hiya, thanks. Yes, he applied for ILR before his DL expired.

When his application was rejected in 2003 he appealed and was granted DL in 2004.

Ok, in this case he should apply for BC in march 2011. Good luck.

Any more opinions please? thanks

Have a big party when you get citizenship, and dont forget to invite me

karwan1 wrote:

mrlookforward wrote:If he applied for ILR in 2007 before his discretionary leave expired, then his stay would be regarded as legal.

Yes I agree with you in this point, but he mentioned that his applcation was refused in 2003, and DLR was granted in 2004, this is why I am asking about his legal situation between 2003 and 2004. If he was appealing at that time, then he should be entitle for BC in 12 months. I have to say all these might change if a new goverment was elected.

It just doesnt matter what was his status in 2003/2004. What matters is the period of 5 years before the application of naturalisation. So if he is applying in march 2011, then we have to look back upto 2006. In 2006 he was legal because he had applied for ILR before his previous DL expired, and he would be regarded as legal, no matter how long it took home office to decide his application and grant him ILR.

thanks guys. I have spoken to two different solicitors who advised that he is eligible to apply for citizenship right now. Thanks

Petana wrote:thanks guys. I have spoken to two different solicitors who advised that he is eligible to apply for citizenship right now. Thanks

HOW!!!
he should be free from immigration limitations for 12 months

HOW!!!
he should be free from immigration limitations for 12 months

Arrh but! He applied for ILR in 2007 and it was not granted until March 2010. That being the case he can apply any time from 15 months after applying for the ILR, once the ILR is actually granted.

So it looks like the Naturalisation application can be made now.

Thanks John. Was hoping you would give an advise. Is there a difference if the ILR was granted within or outside the immigration rules? His one is outside of immigration rules and that's the only thing we worry about. Don't want to put forward the naturalization application and loose the money.. many thanks, Petana

Suggest you download this UKBA document. In particular have a read of 7.5.g.

Sorry, I cannot add to what that says, except to note that it does not mention anything about the route to ILR.

Petana wrote:Thanks John. Was hoping you would give an advise. Is there a difference if the ILR was granted within or outside the immigration rules? His one is outside of immigration rules and that's the only thing we worry about. Don't want to put forward the naturalization application and loose the money.. many thanks, Petana

I personally think he has to wait 12 months as he was a legacy case. All legacy cases have taken years to be decided but the latest grant letters issued to people granted ILR specifically state citizenship in a year. Saw this on a lady who got ILR after 4 years. Otherwise every legacy case will be eligible for citizenship immediately after their grants as almost all of them have been waiting years for their grants.

I personally think he has to wait 12 months as he was a legacy case.

Where is that limitation mentioned in the document I provided a link to?

mrlookforward wrote:

karwan1 wrote:

mrlookforward wrote:If he applied for ILR in 2007 before his discretionary leave expired, then his stay would be regarded as legal.

Yes I agree with you in this point, but he mentioned that his applcation was refused in 2003, and DLR was granted in 2004, this is why I am asking about his legal situation between 2003 and 2004. If he was appealing at that time, then he should be entitle for BC in 12 months. I have to say all these might change if a new goverment was elected.

It just doesnt matter what was his status in 2003/2004. What matters is the period of 5 years before the application of naturalisation. So if he is applying in march 2011, then we have to look back upto 2006. In 2006 he was legal because he had applied for ILR before his previous DL expired, and he would be regarded as legal, no matter how long it took home office to decide his application and grant him ILR.

I am afraid it does matter, though not in this case, and I will explain why it does matter, if he was in breach of immigration rules for even 1 day then he is on breach of immigration rules no matter what legal status he had prior to get ILR status through legay case (in this case DLR), subsequently he should have waited at least 5 years before he would be entitle for BC (year 2015), however, in this case, between 2003-2004 he was appealing against the decision taken on hos application i.e legally resident, so this means he could apply 12 month post-ILR through legacy case.

Mate for your own good, and I don't want to repeat myself, he has to wait at least till march 2011 otherwise if you apply now then you will loss your money for sure.

I am afraid it does matter, though not in this case, and I will explain why it does matter, if he was in breach of immigration rules for even 1 day then he is on breach of immigration rules no matter what legal status he had prior to get ILR status

You are still failing to take into account that it is the status .... "legal" or "illegal" ..... in the 5-year qualifying period that matters.

Please take into account that the OP has been "legal" since 2004.

he has to wait at least till march 2011 otherwise if you apply now then you will loss your money for sure.

Again, please read the link to the UKBA document I provided.

John wrote:

I am afraid it does matter, though not in this case, and I will explain why it does matter, if he was in breach of immigration rules for even 1 day then he is on breach of immigration rules no matter what legal status he had prior to get ILR status

You are still failing to take into account that it is the status .... "legal" or "illegal" ..... in the 5-year qualifying period that matters.

Please take into account that the OP has been "legal" since 2004.

he has to wait at least till march 2011 otherwise if you apply now then you will loss your money for sure.

Again, please read the link to the UKBA document I provided.

Been here in the UK legal/illigal here for 5 years or more alone is not enough to be entitle for BC, since he has been here in the UK he has never been free of immigration rules, he only got ILR march 2010, to be entitle for BC, in addition to legal 5 years residence (lets asume he has this one), he also need 12 months post-ILR free of immirgation rules (which he has not got yet), to make make it free simple:

March 2010+12 month post-ILR (free of immigration rules)= March 2011.

I hope this is clear enough, so if he apply know (without being free of immigration for 12 months), he will loss his money, and I am just trying to help him in this matter. hope this clarification helps.

Which part of the UKBA document that I have provided a link to are you failing to understand?

John wrote:Which part of the UKBA document that I have provided a link to are you failing to understand?

The document you provide unfortunately is irrlevant in this case, he just told you that he got his ILR out of immigration rules through legacy case (not because of his intial application, and this make a huge different), if his application for ILR was successful in 2007, then this would another matter, furthermore, after DLR you have to wait at least 6 years to be entitle for BC application (but that if it was not out of immigration rules), so even he got DLR in 2004, he eventually got his ILR was out of immigration rules, and this was through legacy case, which Isaid is completely different. he still needs to be free of immigration restriction 12 months.

karwan1 wrote:

John wrote:

I am afraid it does matter, though not in this case, and I will explain why it does matter, if he was in breach of immigration rules for even 1 day then he is on breach of immigration rules no matter what legal status he had prior to get ILR status

You are still failing to take into account that it is the status .... "legal" or "illegal" ..... in the 5-year qualifying period that matters.

Please take into account that the OP has been "legal" since 2004.

he has to wait at least till march 2011 otherwise if you apply now then you will loss your money for sure.

Again, please read the link to the UKBA document I provided.

Been here in the UK legal/illigal here for 5 years or more alone is not enough to be entitle for BC, since he has been here in the UK he has never been free of immigration rules, he only got ILR march 2010, to be entitle for BC, in addition to legal 5 years residence (lets asume he has this one), he also need 12 months post-ILR free of immirgation rules (which he has not got yet), to make make it free simple:

March 2010+12 month post-ILR (free of immigration rules)= March 2011.

I hope this is clear enough, so if he apply know (without being free of immigration for 12 months), he will loss his money, and I am just trying to help him in this matter. hope this clarification helps.

Having read the link that John provided it is very clear that Citizenship can be granted now.
It is not ambiguous, it is very plainly stated.
15 months after submission if ILR is granted