Section 4L of the British Nationality Act 1981 is a discretionary registration route that allows adults to become British citizens in special circumstances. This is a new British citizenship rule introduced by the Nationality and Borders Act 2022, which came into force on 28 June 2022. It is also referred to as British citizenship registration in special circumstances. Unlike automatic entitlement routes, Section 4L depends entirely on the Home Secretary’s discretion to grant citizenship based on the specific facts and evidence presented in each case.
Someone who successfully registers as a British citizen under Section 4L normally becomes British ‘otherwise than by descent’. This allows them to pass British citizenship automatically to their children born outside the UK, provided the child is born after the parent becomes British. This is a significant benefit compared to citizenship ‘by descent’, which cannot normally be passed down to children born abroad.
Ultimately, applying for British citizenship under Section 4L is not a straightforward process. This is because every individual circumstance is different, and the discretionary nature of the provision means that establishing eligibility requires careful analysis of historical legislation, official records, and personal circumstances. For this reason, it is always recommended to consult an immigration lawyer who can assess the merits of your case and prepare a compelling application. Contact our immigration lawyers for a free consultation by calling us at 02037442797 or completing our enquiry form.
Who is eligible to apply for British citizenship under Section 4L?
To register as a British citizen under Section 4L, applicants must meet two fundamental requirements:
- They must be aged 18 or over and of sound mind, and
- They must demonstrate that, in the Home Secretary’s view, they would have become, or would have been able to become, British citizens if it were not for one or more of the following three specific statutory reasons:
a. Historical legislative unfairness
b. An act or omission by a public authority, or
c. Exceptional circumstances relating to the person.
The Home Office guidance says you must show what would actually have happened if the problem had not occurred, not just what might have happened. The courts have stated there needs to be “a degree of certainty about what would have happened as opposed to mere speculation about what might have happened”. The decision must be based on solid evidence, not on guesses or assumptions.
Historical legislative unfairness
Historical legislative unfairness addresses situations where discriminatory laws prevented someone from acquiring British citizenship. Section 4L(2) defines this as circumstances where a person would have become, or would not have ceased to be, a British subject, a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies, or a British citizen, if an Act of Parliament or subordinate legislation had treated people equally in three specific ways:
- Where the law treated males and females unequally
- Where children of unmarried couples were treated differently from children of married couples, and
- Where children of couples where the mother was married to someone other than the natural father were treated differently from children of couples where the mother was married to the natural father.
It is important to understand that Section 4L is not intended to address situations where Parliament made conscious policy decisions that applied equally to everyone. For example, the change in law on 1st January 1983, when the British Nationality Act 1981 took effect, is not considered historical legislative unfairness because it applied to all children born on or after that date.
Example scenario of historical legislative unfairness:
Mr A was born in the USA in 2003. At the time, his birth mother was a US citizen, and her female civil partner was a British citizen. The law only changed on 6 April 2009 to treat a mother’s female partner as a parent for nationality purposes. Mr A claims his parents intended to register him as a British citizen under section 3(1), but serious illness prevented them from applying before his 18th birthday. He has never lived in the UK. As the law treated children of civil partners differently from children of married partners before 2009, Alfie may be able to register as a British citizen on the basis of historical legislative unfairness.
An act or omission by a public authority
An act or omission by a public authority covers situations where a public body failed to take necessary action or made an error that directly prevented someone from acquiring British citizenship. Section 4L(3) defines a public authority as any public authority within the meaning of section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998, other than a court or tribunal. This includes government departments and local authorities, but not Parliament or MPs.
Example scenario of an act or omission by a public authority
Miss B was born in the UK in 2002. Her parents held limited leave at the time, so SHE did not become a British citizen automatically. From age 11 to 18, Miss B was looked after by the local authority. She later learned that her parents had been granted indefinite leave to remain before she entered care. An application could have been made to register her under section 1(3) before her 18th birthday. The local authority admitted they had not realised she would have qualified. As she could have become a British citizen but for an act or omission of a public authority, registration under Section 4L may be appropriate.
Exceptional circumstances relating to the person
Exceptional circumstances cover situations where particular events directly prevented a person from acquiring British citizenship. This provision is not intended as a last resort for those who fail to meet other routes. There must be a clear link between the exceptional circumstances and the failure to become a British citizen.
Example scenario of exceptional circumstances relating to the person
Mr C came to live in the UK aged 3 in 2005. His mother was in the UK on a work route, and he was granted leave to remain. When he was 8, his parents separated, and Mr C was kidnapped by his father and taken overseas. Despite police and Foreign Office efforts, Tom could not return to the UK until after he turned 18. In the meantime, his mother was granted indefinite leave to remain in 2012 and naturalised as a British citizen in 2013. Mr C would have been in the UK but for the exceptional circumstance of being kidnapped. If he had remained in the UK, he could have applied for registration under section 3(1). Registration under Section 4L may therefore be appropriate.
The good character requirement
Section 4L(4) states that the Home Secretary may take into account whether an applicant is of good character. However, the good character requirement does not apply in all cases. Whether it applies depends on how the person would have become a British citizen in the past.
The good character requirement applies when a person would have become a British citizen by applying under a route that normally requires good character, such as registration or naturalisation. In these cases, the Home Office must assess the applicant’s character at the time the Section 4L decision is made, not at the time they originally could have applied. This looks at the full adult registration route and requires payment of the British citizenship fee.
The good character requirement does not apply when a person would have become a British citizen automatically by law, without needing to apply. In these types of cases, applicants will not normally be required to meet the good character requirement under Section 4L and should not usually be refused on character grounds. Only the ceremony fee is payable for those who missed out on acquiring British citizenship automatically for one of the three statutory reasons.
References:
