[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales High Court (Administrative Court) Decisions >> Parker, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2015] EWHC 3254 (Admin) (04 June 2015) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2015/3254.html Cite as: [2015] EWHC 3254 (Admin)

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
THE ADMINISTRATIVE COURT

		Royal Courts of Justice Strand London WC2A 2LL
		4 June 2015

1. MR JUSTICE HAMBLEN: This is a renewed application for permission to apply for judicial review. The application was lodged on 6 March 2015. Permission was refused on the papers by Neil Cameron QC on 21 April 2015.
2. The claimant, who was born in Jamaica, seeks permission to challenge the decision of 15 February 2015 made by the defendant which found that she did not have an automatic right to British nationality.
3. The background may be summarised as follows. The claimant was born in Jamaica on 28 July 1958 and would have become a Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies ("CUKC") at birth. As of 6 August 1962, the Jamaica Independence Act ("the 1962 Act) came into force, under which some CUKC citizens ceased to be CUKC citizens and instead became Jamaican citizens.
4. The main issue is whether the claimant and/or her father lost their CUKC status on 6 August 1962 when the 1962 Act came into force.
5. The claimant's father became a British citizen in 1989 by way of a registration provision. That in itself cannot be relied upon by the claimant to acquire nationality.
6. The claimant's father acquired CUKC status on 30 July 1948 when the British Nationality Act 1948 ("the 1948 Act") came into force. The claimant acquired CUKC status when she was born by virtue of the 1948 Act as well. Under section 2(2) of the 1962 Act it states if a person was born in Jamaica and becomes a citizen of Jamaica on 6 August 1962 they lose their CUKC citizenship.
7. The claimant and her father fell under this section as they were both born in Jamaica and therefore prima facie lost their CUKC status on 6 August 1962, subject to subsections (3) and (4) and (8) of the same section, which sets out limited exceptions in which a person retains their CUKC status. They provide:

i. "(3)Subject to subsection (8) of this section, a person shall not cease to be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies under the last preceding subsection if he, his father or his father's father—

ii. (a)was born in the United Kingdom or in a colony; or

iii. (b)is or was a person naturalised in the United Kingdom and Colonies; or

iv. (c)was registered as a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies; or

v. (d)became a British subject by reason of the annexation of any territory included in a colony.

vi. (4)A person shall not cease to be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies under subsection (2) of this section if he was born in a protectorate or protected state, or if his father or his father's father was so born and is or at any time was a British subject.

vii. ...

viii. (8) Any reference in subsection (3) or subsection (4) of this section to a colony, protectorate or protected state shall, subject to the next following subsection, be construed as a reference to a territory which is a colony, protectorate or protected state on the appointed day; and the said subsection (3) shall not apply to a person by virtue of any certificate of naturalisation granted or registration effected by the governor or government of a territory outside the United Kingdom which is not a colony, protectorate or protected state on that day."

8. In her application, the claimant relies in particular on subsection(3)(c) and subsection(4).
9. Subsection (4) is not applicable because Jamaica was never a protectorate or a protected state.
10. Subsection (3)(c) on its face does apply to both the claimant and her father because they were registered as a Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies. However, it is in terms made subject to subsection (8), which says that the reference to a colony in subsection (3) is a reference to a territory which is a colony on the appointed day. The appointed day is the date on which the 1962 Act came into force, which is 6 August 1962. As at that day, Jamaica was no longer a colony; it had become an independent commonwealth country. It follows that, pursuant to subsection(8), section (3)(c) was inapplicable because Jamaica was no longer a colony and therefore the claimant and her father were no longer registered as a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies pursuant to subsection(3)(c). It follows that neither subsection (3)(c) or subsection (4) apply in this case.
11. In refusing permission for judicial review, the Deputy High Court Judge said as follows:

i. "The claimant was born in Jamaica on 28 July 1958 and became a Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies on birth. By virtue of the provision of section 2(2) of the Jamaica Independence Act 1962 she ceased to be a Citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies on the appointed day, 6 August 1962, when she became a citizen of Jamaica on that day that she was born in Jamaica. The exceptions provided by section 2(3) of the 1962 Act do not apply given the definition of colony in section 2(8)."

12. I respectfully agree with that analysis.
13. Reference is also made in the application to Article 8 but there are no outstanding applications from the claimant raising human rights grounds that need to be considered at this point. The sole issue is whether or not she is automatically entitled to British nationality.
14. In my judgment, it is clear as a matter of law that she is not so entitled and this renewed application must therefore be refused.
15. MS MURRAY: Thank you, my Lord.
16. MR JUSTICE HAMBLEN: I have refused your application.
17. THE CLAIMANT: Sir, I would like for permission to appeal.
18. MR JUSTICE HAMBLEN: I shall refuse that permission because I am afraid I consider your renewal application has no real prospect of success.
19. THE CLAIMANT: Sir, I would like permission to appeal to a higher court.
20. MR JUSTICE HAMBLEN: I refuse that permission but you can seek it from a higher court if you wish.
21. THE CLAIMANT: Thank you, sir.