New case on British Overseas Citizens and special vouchers

The ‘special voucher scheme’ was introduced in 1968. It was a way for British Overseas Citizens (BOCs) to come to the UK and remain there until they could naturalise as British citizens. Most people who held special couchers were people of Asian origin who lived in East or Central Africa. The special voucher scheme was abolished on 5 March 2002.

The Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 provided for BOCs who had no other nationality or citizenship to register as British Citizens provided that they fulfilled certain conditions. British Overseas Citizens who held another nationality or citizenship lost the opportunity to come to the UK on a special voucher and nothing was put in its place. In the case of HT (India) [2007] UKAIT 00031 the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (AIT) considered the situation of a dependant of a person who held a special voucher.

HT’s mother lives in the UK. She held a special voucher. HT lived with his grandparents in India. HT argued that he should be allowed to come to the UK as the dependdnt of a special voucher holder. The AIT requested a statement from the Border and Immigration Agency (formerly the Immigration and Nationality Directorate) to assist it in making its decision. It received a statement from Alison Bennett, the Assistant Director of the Managed Migration Strategy and Review Directorate in the Border and Immigration Agency. The statement sets out the history of the Special Voucher scheme and the Border and Immigration Agency’s view that, after they abolished the scheme, there was no question of a person applying as the dependent of the holder of a special voucher.

The AIT found that it was not possible to make an application as the dependant of a special voucher holder after 5 March 2002. The scheme had been wholly abolished on that date. It relied on previous cases about the abolition of the scheme: the Court of Appeal in the case of Modhvadiya [2005] EWCA Civ 1340 and its own decisions in RM (Special Vouchers – representation) India [2005] UKAIT 00067 and PP and SP (paragraph 252-effect of deletion) India [2005] UKAIT 00141. The AIT said that it was not possible to base any arguments on an expectation that the scheme would continue and not be abolished.

The AIT rejected HT’s appeal. The scheme had been abolished. Any application made after 5 March 2002 would not be considered.

There now appear to be few aspects of the abolition of the special voucher scheme that have not been examined in the courts. None of the cases have succeeded. British Overseas Citizens who hold no other nationality or citizenship should consider seeking advice about any entitlement they may have to register as a British Citizen. Other BOCs may still have opportunities to come to the UK: they can explore their options under immigration law, for example the prospects of their being able to come to the UK to work. Those who are citizens of Commonwealth countries and wish to come to the UK to work may be able to apply to come to the UK under the UK Ancestry rule, if they have a grandparent who was born in the UK.

Gherson and Co. has a long history of specialist work on nationality. Not all immigration lawyers also do specialist work on nationality, because this is a very complex area. British nationality law, and the law on which people have the right of abode in the UK can often involve complex inquiries into a person’s family history. The law has become more restrictive in the last forty years, and new limits have been placed on people’s entitlements to come to the UK. In complex nationality cases, specialist expert advice will be needed, to trace entitlements or to understand at an early stage why a person does not have any entitlement to British Citizenship. If the reason for looking at whether a person is a British Citizen is because they want to come to live in the UK, then it is sensible also to consider options under immigration law at the same time.

Alison Harvey, Gherson and Co.