Post
by secret.simon » Sat Sep 11, 2021 1:55 am
The basis of the Romein judgment was the nationality law between 1948 and 1983, where CUKC fathers could transmit their CUKC citizenship to their children born abroad indefinitely if the birth of each generation was registered with the British diplomatic authorities before the child's first birthday.
The Romein judgment considered that even if CUKC mothers tried to register their children with the British diplomatic authorities, as CUKC fathers could, it is likely that the diplomatic authorities either refused or did not have a procedure in place for this request.
So, that judgment tries to right that wrong by essentially directing the government to assume that such a registration was made for the children of CUKC mothers.
In 1983, the law changed significantly. After 1st January 1983, the children of both British fathers and British mothers born overseas were treated the same. Now, both British fathers and British mothers could transmit British citizenship only one generation abroad, except if they met certain conditions before the child's 18th birthday (registration under either Section 3(2) or Section 3(5)).
So, even if your mother-in-law was a British citizen by descent at the time of birth of your wife, your wife could not acquire British citizenship from her. And that would have been the case even if she had a British citizen by descent father.
So, in a sense, even if there had been no discrimination against your mother-in-law, your wife would still not have acquired British citizenship.
I am not a lawyer or immigration advisor. My statements/comments do not constitute legal advice. E&OE. Please do not PM me for advice.