British Citizenship

Question:
I have a question about British citizenship acquired by a U.S. citizen woman through a 1947 marriage to a Canadian-born man. According to this site: http://www.theshipslist.com/Forms/CanCitAq_Natz.htm she would NOT have acquired Canadian citizenship but WOULD have become a British subject. Beginning in 1949, British & Canadian citizenship apparently ceased to be acquired/lost based on marriage (i.e. women started to be treated independently of their husbands). See "Married Women" here: http://www.ukpa.gov.uk/textonly/english/t_who_is_eligible.asp Well, in the mid-1950s, the husband took U.S. citizenship and ceased to be a Canadian citizen, but this should not have affected the wife's status. Does she continue to be some type of British subject to this day?

Answer:
Not "subject", but some type of British, yes - with a proviso or two.... - She appears to have become a British subject by marriage - I can't vouch for the accuracy of TheShipsList's description of Canadian law, but if it is accurate, and the person *hadn't* become a citizen of Canada by 1.1.49, she would have become a citizen of the United Kingdom & Colonies under section 12(4) of the British Nationality Act 1948. - With no other UK connections she would be subject to UK immigration control, so she would have become a British Overseas citizen on 1 January 1983.

I can't see that this is any more useful then an American passport. BOCs can visit the UK without a visa, but so can Americans. Americans can't just settle in UK because they feel like it, and neither can BOCs.... With one further proviso - things may be different if her Canadian husband was from Newfoundland which only joined Confederation in 1949. It won't mean she has full British citizenship but might mean she could be Canadian still. Advantages of BOC citizenship to a US citizen are non-existent unless the person gets permission to live in the UK.

Then there are some advantages: - entitlement to vote and hold some public service positions (before becoming a British citizen) on the basis of being treated as a Commonwealth citizen; and - after 5 years residence (and with indefinite leave to remain), one can become a British citizen through registration which is simpler and quicker than naturalisation. - it may be harder to lose settled status by living outside the UK, but this is not clearly established. The other advantages of BOC status would not apply. Entitlement to the Ancestry visa (as a Commonwealth citizen) is irrelevant as any citizen of the UK and Colonies with a UK born grandparent would have become a British citizen in 1983, rather than BOC, and would not need a visa.

Similarly, entitlement to the working holiday visa (as a Commonwealth citizen) is theoretical for most BOCs, except the small number who are still within the eligible age range. Actually, this bit is established, in para. 17 of the Immigration Rules: "British Overseas citizens who hold United Kingdom passports wherever issued and who satisfy the Immigration Officer that they have, since 1 March 1968, been given indefinite leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom may be given indefinite leave to enter." The bit that is slightly unclear is whether BOCs who present a work permit at immigration get settled status immediately: "A British Overseas Citizens or British Protected person who presents a work permit should be given indefinite leave to enter." It is not clear to me whether it is restricted to UK passport-holders, and whether it must be claimed on the initial entry.

I think it must be restricted to UK passport-holders, since they are the only ones now who do not have prior entry clearance: There is a similar provision, more clearly drafted, in relation to Independent Means entry clearance: "Any person holding a British passport (BDTC, BN(O), BOC, British Subject without nationality and British Protected Persons) with an entry clearance endorsed "Independent Means" should be given indefinite leave to enter (whether or not the endorsement includes the word "Settlement")."

I wrote to the British Embassy in Washington and received this reply: "This person would not have become a British subject through marriage as Canada gained its independence from the United Kingdom on 1 January 1946, you state that they married in 1947 therefore Canadian nationality laws would need to be observed. If they married before Canada gained its independence, they would have become a British subject, however when Canada gained independence they would of had to register to retain British subject status." I have my doubts as to whether this answer is correct.

I don't believe that the status of Canada in the laws of the *United Kingdom* (which is what matters, given that British nationality was governed by the British Nationality & Status of Aliens Acts 1914-43) changed until the British Nationality Act 1948 came into force on 1 January 1949, listing Canada (in section 1(3) of the Act) as in independent Commonwealth country. So it seems to me that, although she mightn't have become a Canadian by marrying a Canadian, this didn't prevent her from becoming a British subject by marrying a British subject while the BNSAA was still in force. And, because she was a British subject who wasn't a Canadian, and she didn't fit into any other category of section 12 or 13 of the 1948 Act, she would have become a BS:CUKC under section 12(4), as I said before.