- FAQ
- Login
- Register
- Call Workpermit.com for a paid service +44 (0)344-991-9222
ESC
Welcome to immigrationboards.com!
Moderators: Casa, Amber, archigabe, batleykhan, ca.funke, ChetanOjha, EUsmileWEallsmile, JAJ, John, Obie, push, geriatrix, vinny, CR001, zimba, meself2
See users extensive topic from 2016.alterhase58 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 2:50 pmHave you considered the Windrush Scheme?
https://www.gov.uk/windrush-prove-your- ... -in-the-uk
The website states:
"You may be able to apply for a document to prove you can live and work in the UK if one of the following is true:
- you came to the UK from a Commonwealth country before 1973
- your parents came to the UK from a Commonwealth country before 1973
- you came to the UK from any country before 31 December 1988 and are now settled here"
This is not a direct path to citizenship (or a passport) but may provide you with a document that will help you.
Cannot comment on this as not familiar with the scheme.
Form T is the main method, tho you might be able to naturalise but you'd have to enquire (it's intended for migrants with settled status).VOR wrote: ↑Wed Nov 18, 2020 1:58 pmCan anyone advise on how I can obtain a British Passport given my circumstances?
I was born in the UK after 1983 to foreign parents who were not married or settled in the UK at the time of my birth.
Years ago I tried to apply for a passport using the Form T, but my application was rejected because I could not provide immunisation records (as my GP had lost the records).
What other methods can I use to obtain a passport?
I have never traveled outside of the UK
Do you have any alternate proof that you were resident in the UK for the relevant period in time?
Not sure how a JR would have worked in this case. It is the applicant's responsibility to prove that they meet the requirements for registration. And the requirements for Form T/Section 1(4) registration are laid out in detail in the legislation.FighterBoy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 15, 2021 9:17 pmYou should've contested it, filing for Judicial Review in court if needed. There's no basis in law to reject someone over immunisation records. The Home Office are clearly overstepping their powers.
Law requires him to prove, on balance of probabilities, he was born in the UK and resided there for 10 years (limited absences). It does not require immunisation, or records thereof. If the home office refuses to register, it can be challenged in the courts. It is the courts who decide whether he satisfies requirements of section 1(4) of the 1981 Act, not the home office.secret.simon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 4:47 amNot sure how a JR would have worked in this case. It is the applicant's responsibility to prove that they meet the requirements for registration. And the requirements for Form T/Section 1(4) registration are laid out in detail in the legislation.FighterBoy wrote: ↑Fri Jan 15, 2021 9:17 pmYou should've contested it, filing for Judicial Review in court if needed. There's no basis in law to reject someone over immunisation records. The Home Office are clearly overstepping their powers.
In this case, of course, there is no doubt that the OP is not a British citizen. The doubt in this case is the level of proof they need to submit to meet the requirements to register as a British citizen.
There is nothing in the Act about child immunisation or having records thereof. Refusal on such a basis can be challenged in court. Any competent judge won't agree that immunisation records are a requirement of the Act - since they aren't.secret.simon wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:44 pmIn this case, of course, there is no doubt that the OP is not a British citizen. The doubt in this case is the level of proof they need to submit to meet the requirements to register as a British citizen.
The OP is free to apply for a judicial review. Indeed, there is a charity (PRCBC) that may be able to help him and guide him on this point.
But until I see a court ruling on such a point of law, I remain unconvinced. The courts in the UK tend to defer to the government on points such as nationality/citizenship law and are averse to a broad reading of the law. It is always worth remembering that the UK does not apply either the European or the American schools of broad reading of the law and heaves more closely to a literal/textual reading of Acts of Parliament.
Yes, balance of probabilities is the standard of proof applicable to the British Nationality Act 1981. The Act does not define the evidence to be adduced.1mic wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 9:36 pm@secret.simon @fighterboy
Balance of probabilities (Page27)-
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... e-v4.0.pdf