British citizenship by triple descent
Apr 16th 2020, 2:36 pm
#21
Just Joined
Joined: Nov 2019
Location: South Africa
Posts: 16
May 4th 2020, 8:11 pm
#22
Forum Regular
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 154
Re: British citizenship by triple descent
Philip Gamble told you that you have a 90-95% probability of being approved. It should be straightforward. I would have him submit an application for you but have him provide you a copy of what he submits for your records. Then, once you have your passport in hand, use their submitted argument to obtain a passport for your sister as well.
May 7th 2020, 12:47 pm
#23
Just Joined
Joined: Nov 2019
Location: South Africa
Posts: 16
Re: British citizenship by triple descent
Yes, i know that and we went further with them but its also not that simple. We were not entirely satisfied with certain aspects which i cannot discuss in this forum. Dont get me wrong, they were helpful up to a certain point.
Hoping to hear from BritInParis soon, feel free to DM me if need be
Thanks.
Hoping to hear from BritInParis soon, feel free to DM me if need be
Thanks.
May 9th 2020, 10:54 am
#25
Just Joined
Joined: Nov 2019
Location: South Africa
Posts: 16
Re: British citizenship by triple descent
I also wanted to mention/add as a matter of interest, that both my parents have British passports. My mother in fact received it quite recently but by descent though. So i know that she cannot pass it on to children.
But my father i believe, and this is where the line is a bit grey, is a BPP (British Protected Person) as far as i can guess/think from my own research, but I'm not clear on this.
So my understanding is that he became a British citizen by the British state/colony, not by descent in any way.
Thanks again,
May 9th 2020, 11:11 pm
#26
Forum Regular
Joined: Jan 2019
Posts: 154
Re: British citizenship by triple descent
BritInParis needs to put this all together for you but I thought I would provide a little detail.
What happened on Independence Day for Malawi is addressed in Fransman's British Nationality Law which is where Gamble is obtaining part of this solution from. I believe that the other part of the solution relies on one parent being otherwise than by descent by having right of abode due to more than one provision of the Immigration Act of 1971. On a basic level, the conditions he mentions are to ensure that both your parents retained their CUKC status on Independence Day, which they did but for different reasons. On Independence Day, our father became a citizen of Malawi but retained his CUKC status whereas your mother retained her CUKC status and did not become a citizen of Malawi.
Where I am not quite certain on the 'why' is why it is important for your paternal grandfather to have been born outside the UK but for your paternal great grandfather to have been born in the UK (or why your maternal grandmother needs to have been born in the UK). I believe it is something along these lines:
I believe the reason for the conditions in this solution is to show that one of your parents is otherwise than by descent because she had the right of abode by virtue of more than one provision. I am not clear on whether this is your mother or father. Hopefully BritInParis can help.
Gamble had a test case in the past where he tried to expand who was otherwise than by descent to include essentially everyone who had a parent or grandparent born in the UK because a British citizen is also a commonwealth citizen and therefore met more than one of the provisions above. The Home Office initially accepted this position but then decided that it applied only to those whose parents were registered as a CUKC or who became CUKCs due to Federal Dissolution (your father and mother). There were a few more conditions see here:
Double Descent RoA more than one provision
On the day of Federal dissolution, citizens of the Federation automatically reclassified them as CUKCs unless they became a citizen of Southern Rhodesia on that date. So your father and mother were CUKCs on dissolution. 6 months later, Nyasaland became Malawi. Now if on independence day a CUKC became a citizen of Malawi, they generally stopped being CUKCs.
So what was the status of your parents on Independence Day? Your father became a citizen of Malawi but your mother did not. This is because if at least one of your grandparents was born in the Nyasaland protectorate then your father gained citizenship of Malawi. Your mother, conversely, did not because neither of her parents was born in the Nyasaland Protectorate.
Now there is the question of whether your father, who gained citizenship of Malawi on Independence Day, also retained his CUKC status. This is important because as a general rule people who became citizens of Malawi were subject to the general loss rule in section 2(3) of the act. In this case, your father retained his CUKC status because there was an exception for any CUKC who was born, naturalized, or registered (or whose father or paternal grandfather were) in a place that remained within the UK and colonies on Independence day. Your father was born in Malawi as was his father. His grandfather, however, was born in the UK. This is why Gamble has the "The relevant grandfather’s father (your great grandfather) born in the UK or any territory that was a Colony, Protectorate or Protected State as of 01.01.1964." but I am not certain why this solution requires the father (your grandfather) to have been born outside the UK.
So both your parents retained CUKC status on independence day. At least one of your parents is otherwise than by descent due to them having the right of abode due to more than one of the conditions mentioned above.
What happened on Independence Day for Malawi is addressed in Fransman's British Nationality Law which is where Gamble is obtaining part of this solution from. I believe that the other part of the solution relies on one parent being otherwise than by descent by having right of abode due to more than one provision of the Immigration Act of 1971. On a basic level, the conditions he mentions are to ensure that both your parents retained their CUKC status on Independence Day, which they did but for different reasons. On Independence Day, our father became a citizen of Malawi but retained his CUKC status whereas your mother retained her CUKC status and did not become a citizen of Malawi.
Where I am not quite certain on the 'why' is why it is important for your paternal grandfather to have been born outside the UK but for your paternal great grandfather to have been born in the UK (or why your maternal grandmother needs to have been born in the UK). I believe it is something along these lines:
The father must therefore have acquired the Right of Abode by virtue of more than one provision of the Immigration Act 1971 and therefore cannot ONLY have acquired the Right of Abode through 2(1)b or 2(1)c & 2(1)b because a Commonwealth Citizen with a parent born in the UK also acquires the Right of Abode under 2(1)d.
For the purposes of the 1981 Act, such a person must therefore be treated as a British Citizen otherwise than by descent and should be able to pass the citizenship by virtue of Section 2, to any children born after 01.01.1983.
For the purposes of the 1981 Act, such a person must therefore be treated as a British Citizen otherwise than by descent and should be able to pass the citizenship by virtue of Section 2, to any children born after 01.01.1983.
Gamble had a test case in the past where he tried to expand who was otherwise than by descent to include essentially everyone who had a parent or grandparent born in the UK because a British citizen is also a commonwealth citizen and therefore met more than one of the provisions above. The Home Office initially accepted this position but then decided that it applied only to those whose parents were registered as a CUKC or who became CUKCs due to Federal Dissolution (your father and mother). There were a few more conditions see here:
Double Descent RoA more than one provision
On the day of Federal dissolution, citizens of the Federation automatically reclassified them as CUKCs unless they became a citizen of Southern Rhodesia on that date. So your father and mother were CUKCs on dissolution. 6 months later, Nyasaland became Malawi. Now if on independence day a CUKC became a citizen of Malawi, they generally stopped being CUKCs.
So what was the status of your parents on Independence Day? Your father became a citizen of Malawi but your mother did not. This is because if at least one of your grandparents was born in the Nyasaland protectorate then your father gained citizenship of Malawi. Your mother, conversely, did not because neither of her parents was born in the Nyasaland Protectorate.
Now there is the question of whether your father, who gained citizenship of Malawi on Independence Day, also retained his CUKC status. This is important because as a general rule people who became citizens of Malawi were subject to the general loss rule in section 2(3) of the act. In this case, your father retained his CUKC status because there was an exception for any CUKC who was born, naturalized, or registered (or whose father or paternal grandfather were) in a place that remained within the UK and colonies on Independence day. Your father was born in Malawi as was his father. His grandfather, however, was born in the UK. This is why Gamble has the "The relevant grandfather’s father (your great grandfather) born in the UK or any territory that was a Colony, Protectorate or Protected State as of 01.01.1964." but I am not certain why this solution requires the father (your grandfather) to have been born outside the UK.
So both your parents retained CUKC status on independence day. At least one of your parents is otherwise than by descent due to them having the right of abode due to more than one of the conditions mentioned above.
Last edited by jmin; May 9th 2020 at 11:15 pm.
May 16th 2020, 12:11 pm
#27
Just Joined
Joined: Nov 2019
Location: South Africa
Posts: 16
Re: British citizenship by triple descent
BritInParis needs to put this all together for you but I thought I would provide a little detail.
What happened on Independence Day for Malawi is addressed in Fransman's British Nationality Law which is where Gamble is obtaining part of this solution from. I believe that the other part of the solution relies on one parent being otherwise than by descent by having right of abode due to more than one provision of the Immigration Act of 1971. On a basic level, the conditions he mentions are to ensure that both your parents retained their CUKC status on Independence Day, which they did but for different reasons. On Independence Day, our father became a citizen of Malawi but retained his CUKC status whereas your mother retained her CUKC status and did not become a citizen of Malawi.
Where I am not quite certain on the 'why' is why it is important for your paternal grandfather to have been born outside the UK but for your paternal great grandfather to have been born in the UK (or why your maternal grandmother needs to have been born in the UK). I believe it is something along these lines:
I believe the reason for the conditions in this solution is to show that one of your parents is otherwise than by descent because she had the right of abode by virtue of more than one provision. I am not clear on whether this is your mother or father. Hopefully BritInParis can help.
Gamble had a test case in the past where he tried to expand who was otherwise than by descent to include essentially everyone who had a parent or grandparent born in the UK because a British citizen is also a commonwealth citizen and therefore met more than one of the provisions above. The Home Office initially accepted this position but then decided that it applied only to those whose parents were registered as a CUKC or who became CUKCs due to Federal Dissolution (your father and mother). There were a few more conditions see here:
Double Descent RoA more than one provision
On the day of Federal dissolution, citizens of the Federation automatically reclassified them as CUKCs unless they became a citizen of Southern Rhodesia on that date. So your father and mother were CUKCs on dissolution. 6 months later, Nyasaland became Malawi. Now if on independence day a CUKC became a citizen of Malawi, they generally stopped being CUKCs.
So what was the status of your parents on Independence Day? Your father became a citizen of Malawi but your mother did not. This is because if at least one of your grandparents was born in the Nyasaland protectorate then your father gained citizenship of Malawi. Your mother, conversely, did not because neither of her parents was born in the Nyasaland Protectorate.
Now there is the question of whether your father, who gained citizenship of Malawi on Independence Day, also retained his CUKC status. This is important because as a general rule people who became citizens of Malawi were subject to the general loss rule in section 2(3) of the act. In this case, your father retained his CUKC status because there was an exception for any CUKC who was born, naturalized, or registered (or whose father or paternal grandfather were) in a place that remained within the UK and colonies on Independence day. Your father was born in Malawi as was his father. His grandfather, however, was born in the UK. This is why Gamble has the "The relevant grandfather’s father (your great grandfather) born in the UK or any territory that was a Colony, Protectorate or Protected State as of 01.01.1964." but I am not certain why this solution requires the father (your grandfather) to have been born outside the UK.
So both your parents retained CUKC status on independence day. At least one of your parents is otherwise than by descent due to them having the right of abode due to more than one of the conditions mentioned above.
What happened on Independence Day for Malawi is addressed in Fransman's British Nationality Law which is where Gamble is obtaining part of this solution from. I believe that the other part of the solution relies on one parent being otherwise than by descent by having right of abode due to more than one provision of the Immigration Act of 1971. On a basic level, the conditions he mentions are to ensure that both your parents retained their CUKC status on Independence Day, which they did but for different reasons. On Independence Day, our father became a citizen of Malawi but retained his CUKC status whereas your mother retained her CUKC status and did not become a citizen of Malawi.
Where I am not quite certain on the 'why' is why it is important for your paternal grandfather to have been born outside the UK but for your paternal great grandfather to have been born in the UK (or why your maternal grandmother needs to have been born in the UK). I believe it is something along these lines:
I believe the reason for the conditions in this solution is to show that one of your parents is otherwise than by descent because she had the right of abode by virtue of more than one provision. I am not clear on whether this is your mother or father. Hopefully BritInParis can help.
Gamble had a test case in the past where he tried to expand who was otherwise than by descent to include essentially everyone who had a parent or grandparent born in the UK because a British citizen is also a commonwealth citizen and therefore met more than one of the provisions above. The Home Office initially accepted this position but then decided that it applied only to those whose parents were registered as a CUKC or who became CUKCs due to Federal Dissolution (your father and mother). There were a few more conditions see here:
Double Descent RoA more than one provision
On the day of Federal dissolution, citizens of the Federation automatically reclassified them as CUKCs unless they became a citizen of Southern Rhodesia on that date. So your father and mother were CUKCs on dissolution. 6 months later, Nyasaland became Malawi. Now if on independence day a CUKC became a citizen of Malawi, they generally stopped being CUKCs.
So what was the status of your parents on Independence Day? Your father became a citizen of Malawi but your mother did not. This is because if at least one of your grandparents was born in the Nyasaland protectorate then your father gained citizenship of Malawi. Your mother, conversely, did not because neither of her parents was born in the Nyasaland Protectorate.
Now there is the question of whether your father, who gained citizenship of Malawi on Independence Day, also retained his CUKC status. This is important because as a general rule people who became citizens of Malawi were subject to the general loss rule in section 2(3) of the act. In this case, your father retained his CUKC status because there was an exception for any CUKC who was born, naturalized, or registered (or whose father or paternal grandfather were) in a place that remained within the UK and colonies on Independence day. Your father was born in Malawi as was his father. His grandfather, however, was born in the UK. This is why Gamble has the "The relevant grandfather’s father (your great grandfather) born in the UK or any territory that was a Colony, Protectorate or Protected State as of 01.01.1964." but I am not certain why this solution requires the father (your grandfather) to have been born outside the UK.
So both your parents retained CUKC status on independence day. At least one of your parents is otherwise than by descent due to them having the right of abode due to more than one of the conditions mentioned above.
Thanks for your reply and details!
I am trying my best to follow and understand what you said. I think i do follow you as i believe this is also my understanding.
However, please note, my mother was born in South Africa not Malawi and received her British Citizenship through her mother via 'double decent' so to speak. This was able through a new law that came to pass due to discrimination through the maternal line. This new provision only came about in 2018 where someone actually made a legal case.
But regarding my Father, where i believe we should likely be able to attain citizenship, was born in Nyasaland/Malawi. My belief from my research is that we should be able to get citizenship through him because he was born at the right time in the British colony. So i would think that he has retained his CUKC status. He does have full British citizenship and we have his birth registration showing his registration under the high commission of the United Kingdom which has the British crest/emblem on it.
Further to the above, there was an indication that he received his British Citizenship through his grandfather and surprisingly not his mother who was born in the UK. This could possibly indicate a case of discrimination due within the new provisions as i stated above with my mother.
But in summary, my understanding is simply that because he was born in a British territory at the correct time and was registered high commission of the United Kingdom in Malawi 13 years after his birth, that he is a British citizen otherwise than by descent.
I hope this information helps and that i worded as best as possible.
Thanks!
Aug 19th 2020, 10:43 am
#28
Just Joined
Joined: Nov 2019
Location: South Africa
Posts: 16
Re: British citizenship by triple descent
Still really wanting help with this.
