Good character requirement - illegal entry/asylum seeker/EU marriage

[confused_and_worried]

Hello,

I am hoping there are people on this forum, either professionals or users like myself who'd be able to provide advice. Here's my story:

I entered the UK clandestinely in April 2006
I claimed asylum on the same day I arrived in the country
My claim was dismissed and appeal refused
Further submissions lodged in 2010
To this day the case remains outstanding
I complied with reporting restrictions and always informed HO about change of addresses, etc.

I married my EU-national boyfriend in 2011
Was subsequently released from reporting restrictions
Applied and received PRC in 2016
Am eligible to apply for British Citizenship now

Am I likely to be refused on the grounds of failing good character requirements? The HO guidance says application would be refused for a period of 10 years from the point of illegal entry, so if that's the case I'm in the clear. But I read about people being refused because the clock started from the point they obtained leave to remain (be it via marriage or refugee status or some other form of leave), not from the point they entered the UK. Is there anyone here who could help me shed the light on this issue?

Many thanks in advance!

[bruteforce]

I am not an expert on this but have a look at british-citizenship/refused-bc-prev-ref ... 18146.html

[confused_and_worried]

Thank you bruteforce, but this does not apply to me as I have never been granted a refugee status

[Tea_Rocket]

Am I likely to be refused on the grounds of failing good character requirements? The HO guidance says application would be refused for a period of 10 years from the point of illegal entry, so if that's the case I'm in the clear. But I read about people being refused because the clock started from the point they obtained leave to remain (be it via marriage or refugee status or some other form of leave), not from the point they entered the UK. Is there anyone here who could help me shed the light on this issue?

I'm not sure which bit of the Home Office guidance you're referring to in your post, but I found this in the AN booklet:

Any immigration offences will also be considered as part of the Good Character requirement. This includes immigration breaches in the 10 year period before you apply for naturalisation – see the section on good character.

It's pretty clear that you need to have no immigration breaches (or any other serious violations of UK law) for the 10 years preceding your naturalisation application. To me, that suggests that the date you acquired leave to remain (and therefore ceased to be in violation of UK law) is what will matter to the Home Office.

I have no experience with this type of case, but based on the above, my guess is that it's 10 years from the last day that you were in the UK without leave to remain, which—if I understand your post correctly—was in 2011 when you got leave to remain as the spouse of an EU citizen. This would mean that you should hold off on applying of citizenship for another four years.

[confused_and_worried]

[/quote]
It's pretty clear that you need to have no immigration breaches (or any other serious violations of UK law) for the 10 years preceding your naturalisation application. To me, that suggests that the date you acquired leave to remain (and therefore ceased to be in violation of UK law) is what will matter to the Home Office.

I have no experience with this type of case, but based on the above, my guess is that it's 10 years from the last day that you were in the UK without leave to remain, which—if I understand your post correctly—was in 2011 when you got leave to remain as the spouse of an EU citizen. This would mean that you should hold off on applying of citizenship for another four years.
[/quote]

This is the bit I find confusing. There was a breach (illegal entry) but it was more than 10 years ago. Being an asylum seeker is not a violation of UK law. My case, in fact, is still outstanding...

[Tea_Rocket]

This is the bit I find confusing. There was a breach (illegal entry) but it was more than 10 years ago. Being an asylum seeker is not a violation of UK law. My case, in fact, is still outstanding...

This is where I am out of my depth. I'm not sure what your legal status in the UK was from 2006-2011, and in particular from 2006-2010, after your first claim to asylum was dismissed and appeal refused, but before you lodged your further submissions. Did you hold any kind of leave to remain during that time?

[confused_and_worried]

After my initial claim was refused, I lodged a fresh claim which was also refused. I then submitted fresh evidence, based on case law (further submissions) and I know that my case was considered to be one of the so-called 'legacy cases'. I never withdrew my application, even after my marriage. In fact, HO wrote to me asking if I wished to withdrew my claim now that I had a status and I replied I did not, as I still maintain I should be recognised as a refugee, but that's beyond the point. So to this day I haven't received a decision on my case
Between 2006 and 2011 I was regularly reporting, never absconded and kept HO updated each time I moved to a new address

[Tea_Rocket]

In fact, HO wrote to me asking if I wished to withdrew my claim now that I had a status and I replied I did not, as I still maintain I should be recognised as a refugee, but that's beyond the point.

A person after my own heart—I, too, would argue the point on principle (whether or not I choose my battles wisely is up for debate).

There are some very knowledgeable people on this board, but it might be that your circumstances are unique enough that no one can advise/feels comfortable advising. To me, this sounds like a case for a solicitor who specialises in immigration law and asylum seekers. At a minimum, you'll have to note on your application that you were in the UK as an asylum seeker from 2006-2011, that you made claims for asylum that were rejected, and that your current case is still pending, but I'm sure you knew all that already.

Once it's at the point of hiring a solicitor, you might also consider whether it's cheaper to just apply and risk losing £1282 if your application is unsuccessful. If it is, then refusal letter should advise you about how long you'll have to wait before you can expect to have an application for naturalisation approved.

[Richard W]

Have you read the published operational guidance? I believe the 10 year ban starts from when the Home Office becomes aware of the breach of immigration law. However, someone needs to check on this - my memory may be faulty.

[secret.simon]

You should be fine as you claimed asylum on arrival and met the Home Office reporting requirements.

9.5 Illegal Entry
In circumstances where an applicant entered the UK illegally, an application for citizenship should normally be refused for a period of 10 years from the date of entry, if it is known. If it is not known, the period of 10 years starts from the date on which the person first brought themselves to or came to the attention of the Home Office.

9.6 Assisting Illegal Migration
The decision maker will normally refuse an application if there are grounds for believing that the person is currently, or has previously been, involved in an attempt to assist someone in the evasion of immigration control. This includes a person whose spouse’s/civil partner’s recent application for entry clearance has been refused on relationship grounds.

9.7 Evasion of immigration control
The decision maker will normally refuse an application if within the 10 years preceding the application the person has not been compliant with immigration requirements, including but not limited to having:
a. failed to report
b. failed to comply with any conditions imposed under the Immigration Acts
c. been detected working in the UK without permission

[confused_and_worried]

Thank you all for your comments.

secret.simon, I thought so too but then I found this:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... n-v1.0.pdf

page 26: "Applicants who made an asylum claim whilst in the UK illegally (for example, as an
overstayer or following clandestine entry), will have been in the UK in breach of the
immigration laws until they were granted leave to remain in the UK. They will be in
breach throughout the period when the application (and any subsequent appeal) was
being considered. This will have been the case whether or not they were given
temporary admission following detection."

[secret.simon]

See the last paragraph on Page 25.

Applicants who claimed asylum immediately on arrival in the UK and were granted temporary admission pending determination of their claim will not have been in breach of the immigration laws while their application was being considered or during consideration of any in-time appeals. Even if their application is refused and any subsequent appeal dismissed, the applicant will still not have been in breach, until their temporary admission was revoked and their leave to enter was formally refused.