Immigrationboards.com

I made an application for UK Citizenship(registration) in October 2017. I received a reply in March 2018 that my UKM application had been denied on the grounds that my mother( through whom I was applying ) was a citizen by descent. I was born in 1966 in South Africa. My mother was born in 1942 in South Africa. Her father , grandfather, great grandfather way back to 1700 all born in London UK. Apart from my birth not being registered ( not able to through my mom ) does anybody have an idea why it was denied ?

UKM is for children born before January 1983 to British born (UK born) mother. So the refusal is correct as your mother was born in SA.

You do however qualify for an Ancestral visa.

Has the law not changed - no more gender discrimination ? Would my mother not have been able to register myself at birth if she had been male ?

My mother has a British Passport, which she applied for many year ago . She never had to register as a British citizen.

No, there has been no change in regards to children born to British citizens by descent. You don't qualify and would not have qualified either to be registered unless very specific requirements were met before you were born and/or turned 18, one of them your mother having lived in the UK for a minimum of 3 years with documentary evidence prior to your birth.

UKM was introduced to remove the discrimination that was in place for UK Born British mothers who were/are British Otherwise than by Descent being unable to pass on their citizenship. UKM is not for British by descent mothers born abroad who has children abroad.

Who advised you that you could apply for UKM?

You are confusing a number of things.

Your mother is automatically British by descent as she was born abroad to British father, so yes, she is entitled to a British passport without the need to be registered. However, this does not extend to her children.

In light of the recent change in the law (UK supreme court March 2018) you most certainly do indeed qualify. If you where born to a British Mother (by way of a British Father, your grandfather) who would have been able to pass it onto you (you would need to have been born between May 1962 and May 1982 in South Africa). I can only assume you where denied as you applied in 2017 before the law change.

CR001 wrote: ↑

Wed May 16, 2018 4:22 pm

Your mother is automatically British by descent as she was born abroad to British father, so yes, she is entitled to a British passport without the need to be registered. However, this does not extend to her children.

It most certainly does!! The Supreme court ruled as such in March 2018. the argument was that fathers by descent could pass on citizenship to their children if they registered them in the first
year of their birth. As British mother's by descent could not pass on their citizenship but the law was amended but that did not help as mothers could NOT register their children. The actual guidance notes now reflect the law change from March of this year to disregard the year registration requirement for "double descent" applicants.
below is the requirement

You will be entitled to registration if you meet all four of the below requirements:
1. you were born before 1 January 1983; and
2. you would have become a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by
descent if women had been able to pass on citizenship to their children
in the same way as men at the time of your birth; and
3. you have right of abode which you acquired because:
(i) your mother was, at the time of your birth, a citizen of the United Kingdom
and Colonies by birth, legal adoption, naturalisation or registration* in the
United Kingdom, Channel Islands or Isle of Man; or
(ii) one of your mother’s parents (the definition of “parent” here excludes the
father, but includes the mother, of an illegitimate child) was a citizen of the
United Kingdom and Colonies by birth, legal adoption, naturalisation or
registration*in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands or Isle of Man at the time
of her birth; or
(iii) one of your father’s parents (the definition of “father” and “parent” excludes
the father of an illegitimate child) was a citizen of the United Kingdom and
Colonies by birth, legal adoption, naturalisation or registration* in the United
Kingdom, Channel Islands or Isle of Man at the time of his birth; or
(iv) you were resident in the United Kingdom for a continuous period of 5 years
before1983 and had become settled in the United Kingdom by the end of
that 5 year period; or
(v) you are a woman who, before 1 January 1983, was or had been married to
a man with the right of abode in the United Kingdom.
*Please note - registration does not include registration on the basis of a
marriage on or after 28 October 1971 to a citizen of the United Kingdom
and Colonies
and
4. the Secretary of State is satisfied that you are of good character.

Thanks for all the input. A little confusing !!! I have actually just read the court ruling that changed the rules, my situation happens to be almost the same . I will do some further investigation.

Yes before March 2018 you would NOT have been eligible but now you are.

expertcitizen wrote: ↑

Thu May 17, 2018 8:24 am

CR001 wrote: ↑

Wed May 16, 2018 4:22 pm

Your mother is automatically British by descent as she was born abroad to British father, so yes, she is entitled to a British passport without the need to be registered. However, this does not extend to her children.

It most certainly does!! The Supreme court ruled as such in March 2018. the argument was that fathers by descent could pass on citizenship to their children if they registered them in the first
year of their birth. As British mother's by descent could not pass on their citizenship but the law was amended but that did not help as mothers could NOT register their children. The actual guidance notes now reflect the law change from March of this year to disregard the year registration requirement

According to the above what prevents those with British by decent father who were born abroad and not registered to also claim citizenship now? Perhaps I'm mistaken but in the court case it was demonstrated that an attempt was made to register the birth.

Correct but the court case also highlights the fact that mothers would not have bothered or may have been refused and there is no record of this at any High Commission / Embassy. This is the reason why the NEW UK-M form guidance notes for case workers expressly says "for those born to British mothers the requirement to have the child registered within the first year of birth is to be disregarded".

BEAR25 wrote: ↑

Wed May 16, 2018 2:15 pm

I made an application for UK Citizenship(registration) in October 2017. I received a reply in March 2018 that my UKM application had been denied on the grounds that my mother( through whom I was applying ) was a citizen by descent. I was born in 1966 in South Africa. My mother was born in 1942 in South Africa. Her father , grandfather, great grandfather way back to 1700 all born in London UK. Apart from my birth not being registered ( not able to through my mom ) does anybody have an idea why it was denied ?

As expertcitizen has advised, after the March 2018 UKSC judgment, children born abroad between 1962 and 1983 to British citizen mothers by descent can now register on Form UKM. You should therefore reapply, and cite the judgment in your application.

Expertcitizen, it may be confusing to refer to the judgment as a "law change". For many people, that implies a change in the relevant Act of Parliament. This was a judgment that reinterpreted an existing section of the law. For the sake of clarity, it may be best to refer to it as a UKSC judgment rather than a law change, which is a term liable to misinterpretation.

Bear25, Any status updates? I'm in a similar situation and I'm curious if anyone has had a UKM approved based on the Supreme Court ruling. I just submitted my application myself. I didn't cite the judgement in my application, but with the changes to the guidance for the UKM, I hope it won't be necessary.

Thank you!

secret.simon wrote: ↑

Fri May 25, 2018 7:37 am

As expertcitizen has advised, after the March 2018 UKSC judgment, children born abroad between 1962 and 1983 to British citizen mothers by descent can now register on Form UKM. You should therefore reapply, and cite the judgment in your application.

Something does not make sense here. Why doesn't it then also apply to those born abroad to British fathers by descent?

Backer wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 14, 2018 5:30 pm

secret.simon wrote: ↑

Fri May 25, 2018 7:37 am

As expertcitizen has advised, after the March 2018 UKSC judgment, children born abroad between 1962 and 1983 to British citizen mothers by descent can now register on Form UKM. You should therefore reapply, and cite the judgment in your application.

Something does not make sense here. Why doesn't it then also apply to those born abroad to British fathers by descent?

I may not be completely accurate, but from what I read in the ruling, the decision was made because past legislation discriminated against women and prevented registration of their children under "British Nationality Act, 1948". This was changed in the "British Nationality Act, 1981". From what I can gather, the only way to make the previous legislation effective, was to waive the registration requirement for the children of those women born between 1949 and 1982. As the legislation did not discriminate against men in the same way it did women, no changes were needed for men to register their children (or would not have been needed had the changes been made in 1948). It was also argued that by waiving the registration requirement for children of British mothers, it created discrimination against the children of British fathers in the same circumstances. The Supreme Court reasoned that British fathers had not been discriminated against in the past, therefore this ruling did not create discrimination against fathers, but corrected past discrimination against British mothers.

I'm being fairly vague, but that's what I got from it. Below is the ruling.

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2016-0165.html

luthersnowak wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 14, 2018 10:07 pm

Backer wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 14, 2018 5:30 pm

secret.simon wrote: ↑

Fri May 25, 2018 7:37 am

As expertcitizen has advised, after the March 2018 UKSC judgment, children born abroad between 1962 and 1983 to British citizen mothers by descent can now register on Form UKM. You should therefore reapply, and cite the judgment in your application.

Something does not make sense here. Why doesn't it then also apply to those born abroad to British fathers by descent?

I may not be completely accurate, but from what I read in the ruling, the decision was made because past legislation discriminated against women and prevented registration of their children under "British Nationality Act, 1948". This was changed in the "British Nationality Act, 1981". From what I can gather, the only way to make the previous legislation effective, was to waive the registration requirement for the children of those women born between 1949 and 1982. As the legislation did not discriminate against men in the same way it did women, no changes were needed for men to register their children (or would not have been needed had the changes been made in 1948). It was also argued that by waiving the registration requirement for children of British mothers, it created discrimination against the children of British fathers in the same circumstances. The Supreme Court reasoned that British fathers had not been discriminated against in the past, therefore this ruling did not create discrimination against fathers, but corrected past discrimination against British mothers.

I'm being fairly vague, but that's what I got from it. Below is the ruling.

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2016-0165.html

Broadly correct.

Before 1983, British citizenship could only be passed through the patriline. A British citizen father by descent could pass British citizenship to his child born aboard if he registered the child's birth with the British Embassy/High Commission within a year of birth.

A British citizen mother, whether by descent or otherwise than by descent, could not pass on their British citizenship at all. Therefore, they would either have not tried to register their children born abroad with the British Embassy/High Commission or they would have been turned away by the Embassy/High Commission even if they tried. Therefore, the Supreme Court reasoned that the fact or otherwise of the child's potential registration should not be factored in when considering applications of children born abroad to British citizen mothers by descent.

secret.simon wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 14, 2018 10:46 pm

luthersnowak wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 14, 2018 10:07 pm

Backer wrote: ↑

Thu Jun 14, 2018 5:30 pm

secret.simon wrote: ↑

Fri May 25, 2018 7:37 am

As expertcitizen has advised, after the March 2018 UKSC judgment, children born abroad between 1962 and 1983 to British citizen mothers by descent can now register on Form UKM. You should therefore reapply, and cite the judgment in your application.

Something does not make sense here. Why doesn't it then also apply to those born abroad to British fathers by descent?

I may not be completely accurate, but from what I read in the ruling, the decision was made because past legislation discriminated against women and prevented registration of their children under "British Nationality Act, 1948". This was changed in the "British Nationality Act, 1981". From what I can gather, the only way to make the previous legislation effective, was to waive the registration requirement for the children of those women born between 1949 and 1982. As the legislation did not discriminate against men in the same way it did women, no changes were needed for men to register their children (or would not have been needed had the changes been made in 1948). It was also argued that by waiving the registration requirement for children of British mothers, it created discrimination against the children of British fathers in the same circumstances. The Supreme Court reasoned that British fathers had not been discriminated against in the past, therefore this ruling did not create discrimination against fathers, but corrected past discrimination against British mothers.

I'm being fairly vague, but that's what I got from it. Below is the ruling.

https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2016-0165.html

Broadly correct.

Before 1983, British citizenship could only be passed through the patriline. A British citizen father by descent could pass British citizenship to his child born aboard if he registered the child's birth with the British Embassy/High Commission within a year of birth.

A British citizen mother, whether by descent or otherwise than by descent, could not pass on their British citizenship at all. Therefore, they would either have not tried to register their children born abroad with the British Embassy/High Commission or they would have been turned away by the Embassy/High Commission even if they tried. Therefore, the Supreme Court reasoned that the fact or otherwise of the child's potential registration should not be factored in when considering applications of children born abroad to British citizen mothers by descent.

Thank you! That is a way better explanation. I am in a similar situation. My mother (CUKC by Descent) was told, correctly, by my grandfather (CUKC) that she would not be able to register her children. I was hoping to hear of someone having their application approved based on this ruling, but honestly, I have found 1 person so far that appears to have benefited from it.

Hi, have been following the new ruling with much interest - I obtained my UK citizenship via UKM on 2/5/2012 after waiting for years for the firstly sexist and then ageist ruling to change to include people like I who were born to UK born Mom's before 1963 - still irritates me that I obtained my citizenship via registration, had to pay £80 and make a formal application and attend ceremony (did not mind that actually - just wish my Mom would have been there to see it) when those born to UK born Dad's just apply for passports, are UK citizens (no "certificate" stating registration), do not have to pay apart from cost of passport, do not have to make a formal application and do not attend ceremony (personally I think anyone from overseas should attend the ceremony - makes you realise how solemn and how lucky we are to be allowed to be UK citizens when born abroad.
I am confused - I cannot see that guidance for UKM has changed to reflect he new changes? Am I not looking at the correct document?
To obtain citizenship via registration and I presume it is registration and not naturalisation based on 8/2/18 Supreme Court ruling one would apply, via UKM form and pay the £80 pounds etc. as described by myself for mine in 2012? No certain amount of years on a visa, then ILR, then citizenship? It IS registration not naturalisation?
Have heard requirements are :
born between 1963 and 1983
born to UK Mom (not born in UK)
maternal grand-father born in UK
Is this correct.
Thank you in advance
Lynnette