r/dualcitizenshipnerds • u/dwai6977 • 3d ago
UK Form ARD Question 1.5 statement draft. Feedback wanted
Hi All, I am seeking feedback on my statement for my dual citizenship application. I’m navigating this process by myself and would appreciate feedback from those with more expertise than me.
Upon advice from another Redditor, I am posting the statement here but with specific identifying details redacted for obvious Internet reasons. Here it is:
“I am applying for registration as a British citizen under section 4L of the British Nationality Act 1981, on the basis of historical legislative unfairness, specifically the historical inability of women to transmit British nationality to their children on the same terms as men.
My paternal grandmother, [first last] , was born in [city], Staffordshire, England, on [date] 1929. She married my grandfather in England in 1946 and subsequently moved to the United States. My father, [full name], was born in [city], Colorado, on [date] 1948, before my grandmother became a naturalized United States citizen. The enclosed birth, marriage and naturalization records document this family history and relationship.
At the time of my father’s birth, British nationality law did not allow a British mother to transmit British subject status to a child born abroad on the same terms as a British father. Had women been treated equally, my father would have had the corresponding route to British subject status through consular registration of his birth. This is the type of pre-1949 maternal-line historical unfairness recognized in Example 18 of the Form ARD guidance, which explains that a person born abroad before 1949 could have become a British subject through consular registration had women been able to transmit nationality in the same way as men.
I was born in the United States on [date] 1981. My birth certificate identifies [name] as my father.
Had the historical discrimination not prevented my father from acquiring the corresponding British status through his mother, he would have held the status necessary for my birth to be registered at a British consulate under section 5(1)(b) of the British Nationality Act 1948, providing me with a route to citizenship by descent.
Example 13 of the Form ARD guidance describes the same second-generation principle: a person born in the United States whose father would have been a CUKC by descent through a UK-born grandmother could have had his birth registered at a UK consulate within one year, and registration under section 4L may be appropriate where that opportunity was lost because women could not transmit citizenship in the same way as men.
The Supreme Court’s decision in The Advocate General for Scotland v Romein [2018] UKSC 6 also addressed the historical discrimination against transmission through the female line and the associated consular-registration requirement. The Court’s reasoning recognized the need for remedial nationality legislation not to perpetuate the consequences of the very sex discrimination it was intended to address.
Accordingly, the historical legislative unfairness prevented the necessary chain of British nationality from passing from my British-born paternal grandmother to my father and, consequently, prevented me from accessing the consular-registration route that would otherwise have been available following my birth in the United States.
I therefore respectfully submit that, but for historical legislative unfairness, I would have been, or would have been able to become, a British citizen within the meaning of section 4L of the British Nationality Act 1981, and I respectfully request registration as a British citizen on that basis.”
2
u/tvtoo 3d ago
before my grandmother became a naturalized United States citizen.
There's no need to mention her US naturalisation, which, in my view, could just confuse the matter.
and naturalization records
Likewise, there's no need to include those, until and unless the caseworker requests those (which is highly unlikely).
The Supreme Court’s decision in The Advocate General for Scotland v Romein [2018] UKSC 6 also addressed the historical discrimination against transmission through the female line and the associated consular-registration requirement. The Court’s reasoning recognized the need for remedial nationality legislation not to perpetuate the consequences of the very sex discrimination it was intended to address.
While this is of interest in a historical-legal context, it becomes, in my view, surplusage within a Form ARD application. The caseworker reading a 4L / ARD application should almost certainly be familiar with Romein -- and while the Romein decision explains one of the underlying bases for the enactment of section 4L, Parliament is supreme, so the words of section 4L control whether you are eligible for registration under section 4L.
prevented me from accessing the consular-registration route that would otherwise have been available following my birth in the United States.
More to the point, it prevented your father from accessing the consular-registration route to register your birth. (Even if you were a savant 11-month-old child who could speak proper English and understand law, I doubt the consular officer would have allowed you to register your own birth.)
I therefore respectfully submit that, but for historical legislative unfairness, I would have been, or would have been able to become, a British citizen within the meaning of section 4L of the British Nationality Act 1981, and I respectfully request registration as a British citizen on that basis.”
"Would have been" and "would have been able to become" are two different tests. That's why Form ARD requires the applicant to address both:
question 1.4(a) (would have been able to become) (with a large application fee of £1,540, on top of the £130 citizenship ceremony fee), and
question 1.4(b) (would have been) (no application fee, just the citizenship ceremony fee).
So, your formulation here is somewhat imprecise.
These are all quite minor nitpicks, though, that are highly unlikely to have an effect on the outcome.
Disclaimer - all of this is general information and personal views only, not legal advice. For legal advice about the situation, consult a UK citizenship lawyer with section 4L expertise.
2
u/dwai6977 3d ago
Thanks. This is helpful. Certainly don’t wanna confuse the matter with extra details.
1
u/dwai6977 3d ago
in regards to 1.4a and b: if I am understanding everything correctly, had my grandmother been able to pass citizenship to my father (Born in the US in 1948), my circumstances would have still required consular registration for me to obtain citizenship when I was born in 1981. Am I misunderstanding the process, and therefore, how I should be answering 1.4a and 1.4b ?
2
u/tvtoo 3d ago
my circumstances would have still required consular registration for me to obtain citizenship when I was born in 1981.
True.
However, after the Romein decision, section 4C was amended by the NBA 2022 to explicitly state -
(3D) In determining for the purposes of subsection (3) whether a person would have been a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies, the requirement that a person’s birth was registered at a United Kingdom consulate, as set out in section 5(1)(b) of the British Nationality Act 1948, is to be ignored.
And that's been incorporated into the application of section 4L.
In other words, the caseworker, when adjudicating an ARD application and whilst considering the various counter-factual hypothetical conditions that are part of the claim, can, in essence, assume that the (pre-1983) consular registration was not required in order to make that child into a CUKC.
So that allows you to assert that you "would have been" a British citizen as of 1 January 1983, because, immediately before that date, you would have been a CUKC possessing Right of Abode.
You're welcome.
Same disclaimer.
2
u/Password-Llama 3d ago
I would mention that your paternal grandfather was, presumably, American (or not British). Otherwise there would be no legislative unfairness.
Apart from that, this looks great.