father denying his sons right to uk citizenship..advice plz

nadiatt · Post by **nadiatt** » Mon Aug 18, 2008 3:12 pm

i am a resident of the uk..actually i was for two years..i came using the work and holiday visa..during my stay there i met a man of pakistani origin and we started to see eachother on nov of 2006 and 2 months after we started seeing eachother he said he would marry me soon and i would meet his parents and i loved him so much, so i stayed with him....in july 2007 i found out that his xwife was not his x wife and that she was still living in his familys home but he said that they were heading down the road to divorce and that eventually she would leave and he could get married to me..he was not married to her by law..well so he is saying,..in oct 2007, we lied to his family cause he wanted to be with me and we told them i was 4months pregnant so they would kick him out..he asked me to call cuz he didnt know how to do it..little did i know i was pregnant with his child, he asked me for us to really try in september for a baby but i told him that it would complicate things and i want him to sort out his life first..he promised to marry me as it would have been the only way for us to be together and for his parents to accept me..my preganancy was a complicated one as i was bed ridden, bleeding and always in pain..i was unable to work and he took care of me and my bills..he started to hit me cause when i asked told him that we should get married for the sake of our child, a child he begged me to have and didnt want me to abort..he even took a fork and hit me on my head and i ended up in hospital..i had to lie to the doctors cuz i was afraid of what he might do as he was right there with me..then he bought a ticket for me and told me that i had to leave the country as he was busy trying to make money to take care of me and my son..i told him that i want my son to have a good future cause the reason that i left my country in the first place was cause my life was hard..we were not privilidged as some..so i wanted to work to earn money i never really had..i wanted him to be born there as it was his and my right..i told him i want a lawyers letter to state that he would apply for my son as he misguided me and said only he could apply for him..he refused the lawyer letter and said that i have his word and he promised to apply and send for us..my plans were to not leave but he took me, forced me and made sure i did..i tried desperately before to find a hostel to live as my mother and they had disowned me and i was ashamed to go home pregnant..due to my status there they told me that i could NOT get help even tho i was pregnant..n i knew no one in england so i had no choice..he said he would not pay for my rent or give me any money so i would be on the streets and so i had to leave..he paid one of his fathers doctor friends to write me a letter stating iwas fit to travel even tho i explained to him i was in pain and bleeding..the doctor said it was alright..2 days later i left the uk i started to get more pains and bleeding and 2weeks later my son was born 2 months premature in trinidad which is not a british overseas territory but a a aprt of the commonwealth...he stayed in the hospital for 3 weeks as he couldnt breathe on his own and had a bleeding in his head...i nearly lost my son cause of him..he was in life and death situation and he not once came to see his son even though he kept saying he would..now his father refuses to apply for him and put his name on the birthpaper and is not sending me any money to take care of him and with no one and no family i am in desperate need of help..he is the director of his company..i dont have any money whatsoever to apply for my son..he has been also telling people that it his not his son and that he felt sorry for me..but i have emails stating that he lied to me about things and emails and texts to prove that he knows it is his son..he has spoilt my integrity and character just to save himself and my son is suffering cause i cannot afford and i lost my family..if my son was born in the uk he would have automatically been a citizen which is what i didnt know and what he didnt want..he mislead me by giving me false information..at the time i left i still had four months left on my visa...now its complicated as he was born in trinidad...please i ask your advice..and for the sake of my son please help me...he is a citizen of the uk but his father is denying that he is his and therefore denying him this right..i havent heard from him in 2 months and he is not sending any money to take care of him as he promised..and i want to prove paternity..let me know what can be done in this situation..

freshprince · Post by **freshprince** » Tue Aug 19, 2008 3:51 pm

Sorry to hear about all your troubles.You are right that being in Trinidad presently makes any rights that you might have had very difficult to enforce.Time however is of the essence here so the common sense approach at this point should be carefully document the whole story from top to bottom,dates,times,specifics,its your word against his so you basically at some point have to prove that what you say is true and there has been gross misrepresentation and breach of trust.Sadly,considering your financial straits you need a good lawyer to pursue this for you,luckily there are so many charity and human rights organisations(UK) that might be willing to take it up for you.Offhand none come to mind but google it.

Sorry I couldnt be of much help but for the childs sake,this obviously needs a lot of intervention from the authorities and well meaning people.(

)

Twin · Post by **Twin** » Tue Aug 19, 2008 4:24 pm

isn't it possible to get another visa to return to the UK just like you got the first time? If it is then I suggest you return to the UK and find a way to make him take paternity test. Once you can prove paternity, I think there might be a way for you to apply for British citizenship for your child.

Afterall, from march 2006, all children born to unmarried British fathers can be registered British?

I am however not sure about how it works when the child is born outside the UK.

All the best.

freshprince · Post by **freshprince** » Tue Aug 19, 2008 7:34 pm

Co sign.

Assuming you didnt breach the conditions of your previous visa,it should be fairly easy for you to return to the UK and petition for him to take a paternity test.

Yes,the rules have been amended to allow the children of unmarried British males gain citizenship.I think most British embassies have a proceedure for verifying claims such as these when there is little or no supporting documentation to support applications for Brit passports,like the Americans you are asked to write a very very detailed account of events leading to why you should be granted citizenship.They refer it to the specialists in-country who verify or disprove your claims.Maybe this should be a worst case scenario should you be unable to return to the UK asap.Heart wrenching state of affairs

.Still..Chin Up!

ricky · Post by **ricky** » Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:06 pm

all what i can say , he is really a heartless knee cap

as others wrote before , you are not an overstayer and you left the uk within your visa date , so i think the best option is to try to get a visa to uk , once you are in uk it will be very easy to drag his sorry mule in the uk court , take paternity test , DNA etc and by law he will be forced to cough up money monthly for his son

Post by **Frontier Mole** » Tue Aug 19, 2008 9:37 pm

This is not going to be a simple case to resolve. Everything is currently stacked against you. Trying to get back to the UK is not going to resolve anything at this time. Even if you could afford to return I imagine it would only be on a visitorâ€™s visa. What could you try to resolve in the UK any better than in Trinidad?

The whole issue revolves around paternity. You need to appoint a legal representative in the UK and pave the way for a DNA test to be carried out on the father. If that can not be achieved by a controlled voluntary test then the only option is to use appropriate legal means. I do not know how that is progressed so you will more than likely have to seek out an answer outside of this forum. ANY FAMILY LAWYERS OUT THERE???

Only once you can prove who the father is then can you start to get somewhere with the UK citizenship of your son. Remember one thing - even with citizenship for your son it does not give you an automatic right of abode in the UK. Your son is likely to be a dual national so can stay in Trinidad; he does not need to be in the UK. It is more than likely he will be better off in the UK however that does not mean you have free access to choose.

Twin · Post by **Twin** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 2:32 am

As per the visa issue, I think once she gets here and file a court proceeding in the civil court, she can apply to the Home Office for a 12 year discretionary leave to remain on article 6 of the EU human rights (citing cilitz v netherlands) and she should get it. That would enable her to proceed with the court case without remaining in the UK illegally.

If things work out for her and she eventually secure her child's British citizenship, she can submit an article 8 application to the home office before her discretionary leave runs out. I think she would have good grounds of staying based on her history. The home office would of course say as the sole carer of the child, there would be no breach of human rights if she is removed from the country but with good representation at the AiT, she should be able to stay. Chikwamba of course would work for her too.

First thing first is to get another visa which would enable her to work. Once she gets to the UK she would need to seek a good family lawyer or to save money, she can apply to the family division f the civil court for a court proceeding on the father of the child. once this has been received by the court and she has confirmation of date of hearing, she would need to put an application to the Home office straight away to apply for a dl subject to article 6. 12 months should be granted initially and if it prolongs, she can ask for extension.

It's a tough road, but I see a light at the end of the tunne.

Frontier Mole wrote:This is not going to be a simple case to resolve. Everything is currently stacked against you. Trying to get back to the UK is not going to resolve anything at this time. Even if you could afford to return I imagine it would only be on a visitorâ€™s visa. What could you try to resolve in the UK any better than in Trinidad?

The whole issue revolves around paternity. You need to appoint a legal representative in the UK and pave the way for a DNA test to be carried out on the father. If that can not be achieved by a controlled voluntary test then the only option is to use appropriate legal means. I do not know how that is progressed so you will more than likely have to seek out an answer outside of this forum. ANY FAMILY LAWYERS OUT THERE???

Only once you can prove who the father is then can you start to get somewhere with the UK citizenship of your son. Remember one thing - even with citizenship for your son it does not give you an automatic right of abode in the UK. Your son is likely to be a dual national so can stay in Trinidad; he does not need to be in the UK. It is more than likely he will be better off in the UK however that does not mean you have free access to choose.

Post by **Frontier Mole** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 9:06 am

Art 6 - used for criminal cases where a right to a fair trail is in question. Can not be used in civil proceedings in country.

Art 8 - the case you quote for those interested see link below. Two things, it was about the removal of an individual and the interference with his family life. It is not a method of saying let me into the country because my child has a right to be there.
As it is a Dutch case it has no force in law in the UK in any event. Merely persuasive.

http://www.legislationline.org/legislat ... less=false

No matter what way it is approached, getting to the UK is not an answer that is suddenly going to solve the issue. Having civil proceedings in the UK courts does not engage Art 6. Getting the kid here and saying he is a Brit Cit does not engage Art 8 either. There is nothing to stop family life if the kid stays with his mother if returned to Trinidad. If the father does not want anything to do with the kid - as he plainly demonstrates then his Art 8 rights to access etc are not engaged. So that leaves a mother with no right to be here with a kid that can have a UK passport. That will not stop removal if she does not have a right to be here.

There are so many obstacles in this case to deal without adding another by coming to the UK on a visa that is likely to be obtained for at best six months.

Twin · Post by **Twin** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 1:59 pm

You are wrong about article 6 and I will prove it to you. It has been used on a number of cases in the AIT.

A dutch case is an EU case. Article 6 is part of European human rights which is ratified by the UK and is part of UK law - you better go figure!

Article 6 isn't only for criminal cases, it is for all cases forwarded under EU law. How can you say to anyone that you can only have a fair trial if you have committed a criminal offence? You think about it.

The home office would not normally remove those involved in continuing family proceedings about children!(google that!)

http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed860

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cg ... od=boolean

I agree that the mother's article 8 rights does not seem very strong at the moment but there is something called the right of a British child who has a right to choose to live in the UK and have it's parents here!

If there are insurmountable obstacles i.e if the child's health could be affected if returned to Trinidad (which could engage article 3) or the father obtains shared residence order (previously custody) which prevents the child from being removed from the UK, she might have strong human rights claim.

Frontier Mole wrote:Art 6 - used for criminal cases where a right to a fair trail is in question. Can not be used in civil proceedings in country.

Art 8 - the case you quote for those interested see link below. Two things, it was about the removal of an individual and the interference with his family life. It is not a method of saying let me into the country because my child has a right to be there.
As it is a Dutch case it has no force in law in the UK in any event. Merely persuasive.

http://www.legislationline.org/legislat ... less=false

No matter what way it is approached, getting to the UK is not an answer that is suddenly going to solve the issue. Having civil proceedings in the UK courts does not engage Art 6. Getting the kid here and saying he is a Brit Cit does not engage Art 8 either. There is nothing to stop family life if the kid stays with his mother if returned to Trinidad. If the father does not want anything to do with the kid - as he plainly demonstrates then his Art 8 rights to access etc are not engaged. So that leaves a mother with no right to be here with a kid that can have a UK passport. That will not stop removal if she does not have a right to be here.

There are so many obstacles in this case to deal without adding another by coming to the UK on a visa that is likely to be obtained for at best six months.

Twin · Post by **Twin** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 4:23 pm

Having any court proceeding engages article 6 as it relates to fair trial!

So tell me, if a mother applies to the civil court for residence order proceedings and she's given a hearing date in october but the home office decides to remove her in September, you tell me this is fair?

Doesn't that automatically breach her right to fair hearing?

If you are a lawyer and I was your client, I would be having serious doubts on your capabilities right now. As if you don't know the ECHR rules, what hope would I have to be adequately represented?

Article 6 isn't only for criminal cases! Do your homework!!

Frontier Mole wrote:Art 6 - used for criminal cases where a right to a fair trail is in question. Can not be used in civil proceedings in country.

Art 8 - the case you quote for those interested see link below. Two things, it was about the removal of an individual and the interference with his family life. It is not a method of saying let me into the country because my child has a right to be there.
As it is a Dutch case it has no force in law in the UK in any event. Merely persuasive.

http://www.legislationline.org/legislat ... less=false

No matter what way it is approached, getting to the UK is not an answer that is suddenly going to solve the issue. Having civil proceedings in the UK courts does not engage Art 6. Getting the kid here and saying he is a Brit Cit does not engage Art 8 either. There is nothing to stop family life if the kid stays with his mother if returned to Trinidad. If the father does not want anything to do with the kid - as he plainly demonstrates then his Art 8 rights to access etc are not engaged. So that leaves a mother with no right to be here with a kid that can have a UK passport. That will not stop removal if she does not have a right to be here.

There are so many obstacles in this case to deal without adding another by coming to the UK on a visa that is likely to be obtained for at best six months.

nadiatt · Post by **nadiatt** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 6:08 pm

ammmm im lost a bit...but what is a dutch case?im trying to follow the advice...

freshprince · Post by **freshprince** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 6:13 pm

Gentlemen,

If you read the ladies account,you would notice she said she was here under the working holiday maker programme,those visas are valid for two years,hence the reason she was able to stay for two years,theoretically she can apply for that again giving her the right to work or she can apply for a visa with a longer validity i.e one or two years.Whilst in country,I submit that she would have more options than she would have outside the country,better access to the legal system for one,her problems presently weigh more on the financial and logistical since apparently she had no freinds/people to assist her while in the UK so its a case of its going to get worse before it gets better.

Again I think her welfare or wellbeing is peripheral to the issue,she is primarily trying to give her son a fighting chance in life with the advantages British citizenship *might have to offer,this is an informal forum and we can only give suggestions to the best of our abilities,I am convinced that there are legal options open that an expert family lawyer would embark on when properly briefed.Its a simple paternity case.What makes it semi complicated is the mothers geographical location/immigration status.

Get in touch with the Child Support agency,I assume that this happens a lot.Discuss the modalities of how to go about the case and get a court directed test http://www.dnasupport.co.uk/gpage3.html

Twin · Post by **Twin** » Wed Aug 20, 2008 10:28 pm

I concur.

freshprince wrote:Gentlemen,

If you read the ladies account,you would notice she said she was here under the working holiday maker programme,those visas are valid for two years,hence the reason she was able to stay for two years,theoretically she can apply for that again giving her the right to work or she can apply for a visa with a longer validity i.e one or two years.Whilst in country,I submit that she would have more options than she would have outside the country,better access to the legal system for one,her problems presently weigh more on the financial and logistical since apparently she had no freinds/people to assist her while in the UK so its a case of its going to get worse before it gets better.

Again I think her welfare or wellbeing is peripheral to the issue,she is primarily trying to give her son a fighting chance in life with the advantages British citizenship *might have to offer,this is an informal forum and we can only give suggestions to the best of our abilities,I am convinced that there are legal options open that an expert family lawyer would embark on when properly briefed.Its a simple paternity case.What makes it semi complicated is the mothers geographical location/immigration status.

Get in touch with the Child Support agency,I assume that this happens a lot.Discuss the modalities of how to go about the case and get a court directed test http://www.dnasupport.co.uk/gpage3.html

Post by **Frontier Mole** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:07 am

I do not concur.

Twin,
The individual is NOT in the UK and therefore can not engage Art 8 or Art 6 in her current circumstances. At this moment in time everything is an unproven claim. For all we know the father might not have UK status in his own right so the child might not even have the route to a UK passport in any event.

She can not demand a right of entry to the UK to take up civil proceedings. She does not NEED to be in the UK to take her case to court. That is why Art 6 is not engaged. The provisions in Art 6 DO not relate to civil proceedings, only those against or involving the state. She is not taking on UK Gov, just the father.

The Art 8 cases you quote are about removal in contested custody -in this case the father does not want the child so custody is not contested. She is not in the UK so can not be removed! Even if she was in the UK and was to be removed she can have a family life in Trinidad as there is no family life interference.

As for EU law as I deal with this aspect on an almost daily basis I can assure you non-UK ECHR decisions are not legally binding on the UK. Only those that originate from the UK are binding. All other non UK decisions are merely persuasive as I have already stated.

The trouble is Twin you read what you want into the circumstances and not the actual facts. The whole point is the mother has an untested paternity claim, not one shred of hard evidence to support her position and no money to do anything about it. To be blunt she should have refused to return home. In doing so she was prepared to put herself and her unborn baby at risk be allowing herself to be returned so late in pregnancy.

It is obvious to all she has been treated unfairly but that does not mean she has rights to be in the UK. By all means apply for a visa, do not expect it to be granted on the basis of an unsubstantiated claim the father of the child is from the UK. It will not get entertained.

Post by **Frontier Mole** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:11 am

ps

Who can't apply for child maintenance through the CSA?

There are some instances where, because of a parent's circumstances, we may not be able to accept an application. For example, we may not accept cases where:

the parent with care or the children are living abroad

Post by **Frontier Mole** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:42 am

Twin - a few people actually know who I am on this site - take it as read - I have more cases under my belt than most. Just to prove another point have a read of Art 6 below. Proceddings in the Family Court would engage Art 6 but not so much as to allow / force entry to the UK. Immigration control takes presedence over the Family Courts so even when a contact order is in place it does not automatically prevent removal from the UK. Criminal deports overtake the right of contact as an example.

ARTICLE 6
In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgement shall be pronounced publicly by the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interest of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice.
Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.
Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights:
(a) to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him;
(b) to have adequate time and the facilities for the preparation of his defence;
(c) to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require;
(d) to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him;
(e) to have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand or speak the language used in court.

Twin · Post by **Twin** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:01 am

You know you are wrong but wouldn't admit it.

I never mentioned anywhere that the OP can apply for leave on the basis of court proceeding whilst outside the UK.

Calm down and stop thinking you know it all and re-read my posts.

I have advised that the OP find a way to return to the UK on a similar visa to the one she previously entered on. Whilst in the UK, she can initiate a court proceeding regarding paternity testing. Whilst doing this and so as for her not to overstay she can apply for a leave to remain under article 6 for a discretionary leave citing ciliz v Netherlands. On this basis she could obtain 12 years dL for a start.

However, Freshprince has reminded us that provided she obtains the same visa as before, she wouldn't need to apply to the home office as she would have enough time to go through court if she so wishes.

Don't be silly Frontier Mole! No one is advising her to apply for a visa on the basis of returning for paternity test! How stupid is that?!

She can apply for the same visa as she did the first time and sort the rest out when she returns to the UK!

Goodness me! If it's so hard for your to read simple texts without jumping into uninformed information, how do you deal with immigration cases?

I am afraid for your clients (if you have any) - REALLY!!

Frontier Mole wrote:I do not concur.

Twin,
The individual is NOT in the UK and therefore can not engage Art 8 or Art 6 in her current circumstances. At this moment in time everything is an unproven claim. For all we know the father might not have UK status in his own right so the child might not even have the route to a UK passport in any event.

She can not demand a right of entry to the UK to take up civil proceedings. She does not NEED to be in the UK to take her case to court. That is why Art 6 is not engaged. The provisions in Art 6 DO not relate to civil proceedings, only those against or involving the state. She is not taking on UK Gov, just the father.

The Art 8 cases you quote are about removal in contested custody -in this case the father does not want the child so custody is not contested. She is not in the UK so can not be removed! Even if she was in the UK and was to be removed she can have a family life in Trinidad as there is no family life interference.

As for EU law as I deal with this aspect on an almost daily basis I can assure you non-UK ECHR decisions are not legally binding on the UK. Only those that originate from the UK are binding. All other non UK decisions are merely persuasive as I have already stated.

The trouble is Twin you read what you want into the circumstances and not the actual facts. The whole point is the mother has an untested paternity claim, not one shred of hard evidence to support her position and no money to do anything about it. To be blunt she should have refused to return home. In doing so she was prepared to put herself and her unborn baby at risk be allowing herself to be returned so late in pregnancy.

It is obvious to all she has been treated unfairly but that does not mean she has rights to be in the UK. By all means apply for a visa, do not expect it to be granted on the basis of an unsubstantiated claim the father of the child is from the UK. It will not get entertained.

Post by **JAJ** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:06 am

If the father's link to the child is established, child will be regarded as a British citizen provided that the father is born or naturalised in the U.K.

If father refuses to co-operate, paternity can still be established by other means, such as a court order.

Twin · Post by **Twin** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:07 am

Nothing is automatic in immigration! We know!

As it is true that Home office still has authority to remove even when there is a contact order, the HO office have in the same vein published that they would seldom remove someone whilst a court proceeding is pending!

By the way, I said Residence order! Home office cannot remove a parent with residence order without the court's permission (as opposed to contact order) and I am yet to read a case where the court have allowed this to happen.

A residence order is far stronger than a contact order.

Do you take time to read at all?

Frontier Mole wrote:Twin - a few people actually know who I am on this site - take it as read - I have more cases under my belt than most. Just to prove another point have a read of Art 6 below. Proceddings in the Family Court would engage Art 6 but not so much as to allow / force entry to the UK. Immigration control takes presedence over the Family Courts so even when a contact order is in place it does not automatically prevent removal from the UK. Criminal deports overtake the right of contact as an example.

ARTICLE 6
In the determination of his civil rights and obligations or of any criminal charge against him, everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law. Judgement shall be pronounced publicly by the press and public may be excluded from all or part of the trial in the interest of morals, public order or national security in a democratic society, where the interests of juveniles or the protection of the private life of the parties so require, or the extent strictly necessary in the opinion of the court in special circumstances where publicity would prejudice the interests of justice.
Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.
Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following minimum rights:
(a) to be informed promptly, in a language which he understands and in detail, of the nature and cause of the accusation against him;
(b) to have adequate time and the facilities for the preparation of his defence;
(c) to defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing or, if he has not sufficient means to pay for legal assistance, to be given it free when the interests of justice so require;
(d) to examine or have examined witnesses against him and to obtain the attendance and examination of witnesses on his behalf under the same conditions as witnesses against him;
(e) to have the free assistance of an interpreter if he cannot understand or speak the language used in court.

Twin · Post by **Twin** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 2:21 am

As for EU law as I deal with this aspect on an almost daily basis I can assure you non-UK ECHR decisions are not legally binding on the UK. Only those that originate from the UK are binding. All other non UK decisions are merely persuasive as I have already state

d

Don't assure me of something you are not sure of! Go and read extensively on how paragraph 246 of the immigration rule came to being and come back and prove to me that ECHR decisions are not legally binding in the UK.

Haven't I directed you to two case laws where this has been the case?

There are more if you want!

Gosh! I hate it when people argue blindly!!

Read the immigration handbook JCWI 2006 edition and you will find out that paragraph 246 was brought into immigration law on the back of Berrehab vs. Netherlands: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12289697
before it was later amended also on another EU case law Hannah Youseff Abdulla!

Wanderer · Post by **Wanderer** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:25 am

Twin wrote: However, Freshprince has reminded us that provided she obtains the same visa as before, she wouldn't need to apply to the home office as she would have enough time to go through court if she so wishes.

You can only have one WHM visa, ie you can't apply for another after having had one.

How do I qualify as a working holidaymaker?
You must be able to show that you:
are a citizen of a country listed in Appendix 3 of the Immigration Rules, a British Overseas Territories citizen, a British Overseas citizen or a British National (Overseas)
are aged between 17 and 30
want to come to the UK for an extended holiday, and intend to take employment as part of your holiday for no more than 12 months during your stay
do not intend to set yourself up in or run a business, or work as a professional sportsperson during your stay
are single, or that you are married to, or the civil partner of someone who also qualifies as a working holidaymaker and you plan to take the working holiday together
do not have any dependent children aged five or over, or who will be five before your holiday ends
can support yourself in the UK without needing any help from public funds
have not spent time in the UK on a previous working holidaymaker visa, and
intend to leave the UK at the end of your holiday.

Post by **Frontier Mole** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:19 am

Twin,

If you want to state that non-UK ECHR cases are binding in law on the UK then go ahead. But that is not the case.

Yes there are non-UK ECHR cases that have lead to amendment of the UK law - however it was and still is entirely up to the UK to deceide to amend or not in responce to non-UK ECHR judgements. There are many ECHR cases that state ceratin points that are ignored by the UK. There are others that would help UKBA to enforce even harsher views held by some other countries. It just does not work like that. Hence when there is a case in point and it can be seen that it has direct relevence to UK immigration law it will be persvasive. At that time the immigration law is ameded.

Twin · Post by **Twin** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:45 pm

Wanderer wrote:
Twin wrote:

You can only have one WHM visa, ie you can't apply for another after having had one.

which is why my advise would be useful to her, then.

If she can at least come in on a visit visa (hopefully), she can start court proceeding on the father's child and apply for a DL whilst in process which would allow her time to finalise the process of obtaining British citizenship for her child.

jei2 · Post by **jei2** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 12:50 pm

nadiatt,

Do you actually have any evidence that your son's father is British or legally settled in the UK? If not your case may be a non-starter.

Otherwise..I note that you say it was your right to have your son born in the UK.. you also refer to yourself as a resident of the UK. I assume that this is just you expressing your desire. The reality is quite different so try not to get confused as it will only cause you more heartache.

If his father has legal status and you are serious about sorting your son's paternity out it will be for his sake later in life not yours. It doesn't get you leave to remain in the UK simply because your life in Trinidad is hard.

Finding a UK family lawyer - one that likes a challenge - should be your first goal. My concern is that if you try to come back - even with a good immigration record -you might suffer from the fallout of the visa waiver test. Unfortunately for you, you fell in love with a..a...

Anyway, focus less on the emotional aspects and approach as many family lawyers as you can. Immigration legislation does ultimately override family law and I can't see the father going for a residence order so it's not going to be easy. Although I wouldn't say impossible.

Twin · Post by **Twin** » Thu Aug 21, 2008 1:39 pm

If a case is being argued purely under the immigration rules, then perhaps ECHR wouldn't be legally binding. However if an ECHR ground is put forward eg article 8, then an EU caselaw would most certainly be binding!

Frontier Mole wrote:Twin,

If you want to state that non-UK ECHR cases are binding in law on the UK then go ahead. But that is not the case.

Yes there are non-UK ECHR cases that have lead to amendment of the UK law - however it was and still is entirely up to the UK to deceide to amend or not in responce to non-UK ECHR judgements. There are many ECHR cases that state ceratin points that are ignored by the UK. There are others that would help UKBA to enforce even harsher views held by some other countries. It just does not work like that. Hence when there is a case in point and it can be seen that it has direct relevence to UK immigration law it will be persvasive. At that time the immigration law is ameded.

Immigrationboards.com: Immigration, work visa and work permit discussion board

father denying his sons right to uk citizenship..advice plz

father denying his sons right to uk citizenship..advice plz