Upper Tribunal Guidance On Deprivation Of British Citizenship Appeals

• Published date: 01 November 2022
• Subject Matter: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration, Immigration, Trials & Appeals & Compensation, General Immigration
• Law Firm: Richmond Chambers Immigration Barristers
• Author: Mr Alex Papasotiriou

In its judgment published on 20 October 2022 in Berdica (Deprivation of citizenship: consideration) [2022] UKUT 00276 (IAC), the Upper Tribunal considered further the Tribunal's jurisdiction and approach to deprivation of British citizenship appeals, following the Supreme Court's judgement in Begum v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] UKSC 7 and the Upper Tribunal's own consolidated guidance in Ciceri (deprivation of citizenship appeals: principles) [2021] UKUT 238.

Facts of the Berdica Deprivation of British Citizenship Appeal

The appellant in Berdica had appealed to the First-tier Tribunal against the decision of the Secretary of State for the Home Department to deprive him of his British citizenship on the basis it had been acquired by fraud. The First-tier Tribunal dismissed his appeal. He was granted permission to appeal to the Upper Tribunal against the First-tier Tribunal's decision.

The appellant had entered the UK in 1998 and claimed asylum on the basis that he was a Kosovan national. He gave his date of birth as 11 April 1982, making him an unaccompanied minor at the date of his asylum application. He was found credible and recognised as a refugee, being granted exceptional leave to remain until 2002. He was granted indefinite leave to remain in 2000 and naturalised as a British citizen in 2005.

The appellant was in fact a national of Albania, born on 11 April 1978. This came to the respondent's attention in 2009, when, in the context of an application for entry clearance by his then fiancée, sponsored by the appellant, the appellant's Albanian birth certificate was submitted. Following this, the respondent wrote to the appellant, advising she had cause to believe he had obtained his citizenship by fraud.

The appellant provided written reasons explaining that, although he had relied on a false identity, he had not done so dishonestly. Having moved from Albania to Kosovo at the age of one year, he was not aware of his Albanian nationality or true age. He only discovered the truth in 2006, when he made enquiries with the Kosovan authorities, and subsequently the Albanian authorities, in order to acquire his birth certificate to sponsor his fiancée's application for entry clearance.

In 2013, the respondent informed the appellant that his British citizenship was a nullity. This decision was not challenged by the appellant, to the Upper Tribunal's knowledge, but it was withdrawn in light of the Supreme Court's judgment in R (Hysaj) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2017] UKSC 82. The respondent accepted that the appellant was a British citizen but considered deprivation action under section 40(3) of the British Nationality Act 1983, in view of the appellant's false representations. A notice of decision to deprive...