- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe, CR001, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix
The principle of demanding good character when people were originally denied British nationality as a result of an 'injustice' was felt by the Supreme Court to be incompatible with the European Declaration of Human Rights - the case of heroin dealer Eric Erron Johnson. The pricing of UKM and UKF applications is based on their both righting 'injustices'. Of course, the HO may simply consider this judgement, delivered on 19 October 2016, to simply be wrong. (I'm not sure the dealer's appeal against deportation will succeed/has succeeded - what of the argument that if the dealer had become British, he could be stripped of British nationality for involvement in serious, organised crime? The precedent of David Hicks comes to mind.)JAJ wrote:Based on the Nationality Instructions, the Home Office usually do not look at bankruptcy cases where discharge was more than 10 years ago. If less than this time has past they look at the circumstances of the bankruptcy, especially if the individual has been disqualified as a company director or the bankruptcy was related to non payment of taxes. And although it's not specifically discussed in the Nationality Instructions, guide UKM states that the application is likely to be refused if someone is an undischarged bankrupt.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... r_2015.pdf
AS I understand this the court did two things- quash the deportation order (the case was actually about deportation rather than a citizenship application) and issued a "declaration of incompatibility" for the good character provisions as they relate to UKF applications. This does not change the law but provides an expedited route for it to be changed should the Secretary of State choose to do so. In the meantime, as I understand it, the law remains in force- but an immigration solicitor could advise in more detail.Richard W wrote: The principle of demanding good character when people were originally denied British nationality as a result of an 'injustice' was felt by the Supreme Court to be incompatible with the European Declaration of Human Rights - the case of heroin dealer Eric Erron Johnson. The pricing of UKM and UKF applications is based on their both righting 'injustices'. Of course, the HO may simply consider this judgement, delivered on 19 October 2016, to simply be wrong. (I'm not sure the dealer's appeal against deportation will succeed/has succeeded
Two separate issues- and the bar for deprivation of British citizenship is substantially higher than the good character test for its acquisition.- what of the argument that if the dealer had become British, he could be stripped of British nationality for involvement in serious, organised crime? The precedent of David Hicks comes to mind.)
You are saying that at present the home office are not applying the good character test? Where are you getting this information from? Is this just surmised from the court ruling?Obie wrote:UKF or UKM are irrelevant. The policy applies mutatis mutandis, and the declaration made by the court indicates that it's application extends beyond UKF, and covers UKM as well.
I appreciate that an act of parliament is not invalidated by the court, and that parliament has to make a remedial order, but the practise of the Home Office at present is they don't apply the good character test.
The case of Mr Hick's is different. Mr Hick was considered to have acted against the crown in a treasonous manner, and hence he was deprived of his citizenship. He was not made stateless as a result of that act, as he had Australian citizenship.
OP's case can be assimilated to Johnson that Hicks.
Except that it's not clear that an application for citizenship will trigger a Certificate of Application that allows a right to work. It's very unusual for someone in the U.K. to apply for UKM. Most people with ILR or Right of Abode would be applying for naturalisation instead.Scouse Mouse wrote:I have two options to obtain the documentation needed to satisfy the Employer I can legally work in the UK, a Biometric Residence Permit or British Citizenship. From the Home Office helpline I was led to understand once an application for British Citizenship has been received, the reference number issued will satisfy the right to work checks, the same as a Biometric application.
Based on Obie's comments, the Home Office may not be applying the good character requirement to UKM/UKF cases but unless they update the published guidance, you likely find out by actually applying.From what's been said above the home office are not applying the good character requirement to UKM or UKF Citizenship application?
Those requirements will still be applied (although to a lesser extent) to any Biometric application?
Should I take the chance of applying to register for British Citizenship through UKM, or safer to apply for a Biometric?
Would you advise I consult an immigration lawyer first?
Anything can be challenged if you have enough time and money- challenging it successfully is another question. Parliament decided not to automatically confer British citizenship, in part because some of those concerned might not wish to have British citizenship. Especially if they hold another citizenship from a country that restricts dual citizenship. I would be difficult to show that the arrangements already in place are unreasonable.Scouse Mouse wrote:Why I wonder has the law not been challenged to give automatic citizenship by descent to children born to a British mother? Could it be challenged?
You have the right to work- what you are lacking is evidence of the right to work. Others may comment further, but you may well be able to work as self-employed provided a potential customer is not under similar requirements to verify your status before offering you a contract. Perhaps ask on the General U.K. Immigration forum- or discuss with an immigration solicitor?Can you help me understand how I have indefinite leave to live and work in the UK yet since 2014 I no longer have the right to work in the UK?
Or do I still have the right to work in the UK, just not able to be offered that work? Can I still work as self employed?
Your grandfather was automatically Irish under the 1956 Act (first generation Irish by descent) and your mother would have been eligible for registration as an Irish citizen under the Foreign Births Register. If she had registered before 1 July 1986, her citizenship would have been retroactive to the earlier of her date of birth or the commencement of the 1956 Act- in that case, you would likely be eligible to register as an Irish citizen yourself. However, the number of persons in mainland Britain who actually claimed Irish citizenship by Foreign Birth Registration between 1956-1986 is, as far as I understand- quite low.Scouse Mouse wrote:That's interesting about claiming Irish Citizenship as my Great Grandparents were Irish. However they left Ireland before the turn of the 20th century and my grandfather was born in St Helens in 1901.
As the Foreign Births Register wasn't created until 1956 they wouldn't have been able to register him as an Irish Citizen would they? So that avenue seems closed to me?