₦airaland Forum

big_bumper:
If
Statement 1

why?
How did/How does
Statement 2
Do you see how you are contradicting yourself with Akolawole's contradiction whilst still insisting that there is no contradiction? https://emoticons4u.com/crazy/069.gif https://emoticons4u.com/crazy/069.gif https://emoticons4u.com/crazy/069.gif

Big bumper,

You dis gerl self,I'm beginning to have serious concerns as to your competence
to carry out your functions of an advisor as appointed by Sienna. I think I will
have to have a word with him and express my concerns.

1. Surely you must know that until the enactment and coming into force of the 1981 act
   anyone born in the UK (except for some limited exceptions) was automatically a UK citizen.
   As I stated earlier it was this act which took away the right to automatic citizenship by birth
   regardless of your parentage on 01/01/1983.
2. Can't see how I have contradicted myself here.Assuming this scenario happened post 01/07/06
    the baby would be a UK national and therefore no need for any kind of settlement visa. She is in
    effect not subject to immigration control.

Get it together girl, you'll have to do better than this to trip me up.

big_bumper:
What year are we in again? I could have bet with my life that it was 2008, so four years ago would be hmmn https://emoticons4u.com/crazy/1087.gif  https://emoticons4u.com/crazy/1087.gif  https://emoticons4u.com/crazy/1087.gif. . .


[s]off to count my toes and fingers, It's about time I start listening to my shrink and wean myself off those chocolate https://emoticons4u.com/crazy/1412.gif before it becomes the end of me[/s]


@ Vor
My defection to the other side is only temporary o, We are still team left-wingers for life.     

Big bumper,

Na so pesin de fail exam when them no read question properly.
Ako said the ting happen within the last four years, so it could
be four years ago or it could even be yesterday.

If you no take time I will even recommend that you sign up for remedial
English as well as remedial Immigration law.

Akolawole:
@VOR and others

That scenario happens within the last 4 years.

You will have to be more specific than that, was it pre or post July 2006?

big_bumper:
The sole purpose of the BNA Act of 1981, which was enacted on the 1st of Jan 1983, was to give mothers whom were either British or settled the same equal right that was only previously accorded to the dad only. Before the Act was passed, only married fathers could confer automatic citizenship on their off-spring.

The only difference was that after this date, whilst the British/Settled dad had to be legitimately married, the British/Settled mother did not have to be, until July 2006 when the law changed again.

So in effect, Maggie was born when her papa (seun) was not yet married to the her mum (funky), so she was an omo-ale (illegitimate child), hence did not qualify for citizenship status yet, until her parents got married.

I am going to deduct further marks for challenging my authority for calling me, your teacher olódo

Big Bumper,

I disagree with you when you say the sole purpose of the 1981
BNA Act was to give mothers' the same right as fathers'. This was
a consequence of the act but it certainly wasn't the only effect of
the act. Don't forget that it was this act which took away the right
to automatic British nationality by birth, I would argue that this was
more fundamental than a person's right to nationality through the mother.

If the sole purpose of the act was to effect the change you pointed out
than all that needed to be done was to amend the 1971 act.

With regards to Ako's poser, as he put no dates in his scenario I only
gave it consideration as the law currently stands. I didn't think it necessary
to go through all periods of time. How far back and where would I stop?

So give me full marks.

Big Bumper(my mind continues to boggle at your name )

I suggest you take a course in remedial Immigration Law.

I provide for you below an extract from the BNA 1981 which deals
with British Citizenship:

Acquisition by birth or adoption.— (1) A person born in the United Kingdom after commencement shall be a British citizen if at the time of the birth his father or mother is—
(a)a British citizen; or
(b)settled in the United Kingdom .

No where does it say that the father and mother have to be married at the time of birth.

That being the case you need to upgrade my marks. I suggest 100% and register for the course.

Ako

1. Maget becomes a British citizen at birth.

2. Her mother is not entitled to free health service at the time of birth unless it was an emergency.Obviously being in    labour could be said to be an emergency.

3. I can't see any contradiction in law, although there would be no requirement for the baby to apply for a settlement visa since she is a British citizen.

I certainly wont be boycotting BA in support.

Afterall we have only his word as to what happened
at the moment.

1986?

Then she will not qualify for UK CITIZENSHIP by virtue of birth I'm afraid.

@Travelcare,

Since 1983 being born in the UK no longer makes one an automatic
UK national.

My guess is that most of these women want to give birth in the UK because
of the perceived better health care in the UK and because in more case than
not they will not be asked for payment.

@VOR
I guess your son has grown now.i know u are a very busy man,but i must confess,i like your approach to this forum and would like to keep in touch with privately incase i need any advise on how to go about settling down here as i am "fresh" into the country.how do i get your e-mail add?

Liliana,

Thank you so much and welcome to the VAS (Vor appreciation society)
I am most flattered with your kind words. I am also glad to know that everything
has turned out fine for you and you are hopefully settling down in the UK.
Have you managed to obtain your dream job?

These days I only make the occasional guest appearance on the board as other
matters now take precedence. My son has now been joined by a sister and madam
needs all the help she can get.

Anyway I am available for any advice I can give, I will e-mail you IDC.

@ Gamine,

Sure, I just love pussies.

Gamine,

Those pussies are so sweet.

I too am tired of this whole argument on 28 days or not.

I will say however that the response Ako received from the AIT
is Wrong with a capital W. It was probably penned by a low
ranking AA (Admin Assistant) who does not know his arse from his elbow.

The AIT rules which I have posted here previously make it quite clear
that the count starts from the date of SERVICE and NOT the date of
decision. I would rather be guided by these rules than some AA in the AIT.

Y'all can believe what you want but from now I will be making no more contributions
to this topic, it is becoming tedious and repetitive.

I'll be back when some other interesting point requires addressing, but for now my
pikin need dem papa.

ogb5,

Good perspective.

However, I would like to point out one historical inaccuracy.
The Lagos State metroline project as I remember it was not
frustrated by Shagari and his govt. During Shagari's govt the
Lagos state govt had signed all contracts for the project and it was
close to going ahead.

We then had the Buhari/Idiagbon coup of 1983(?) and it was this govt
which effectively pulled the plug on the project leaving the Lagos State
govt with a massive bill for breach of contract with the contractors.

Vic

I think your comments are unwarranted and without
any foundation. The lady/girl made a simple reasonable
request, why do you presume there is something sinister
about it?

@Funky/Ako,

The time starts counting from the day of service, not the day when the refusal
notice is signed. I thought I had convinced you of this with my reference to the AIT rules
and procedures. This is regardless of whether it is 28 or 56 days.

With regards to the 56 day thing. I think this is just local practice to take into account
the "Nigerian Factor" ie poor postal service. Since applicants are not at a disadvantage
the AIT will not take issue with it and insist on 28 days. It certainly is not provided for
legislatively.

Bookish ke?

I like facts and you have so far produced none to substantiate your
56 day policy. Are you sure the BHC is not telling applicants this just
so they can be left alone and in fact they have no legal basis to insist on this?

You will note that the legislation talks about filing a notice 10 days after service
of the determination and not 10 days after the actual decision.

I still say unto you, provide me with legislation supporting your 56 day policy.
If you fail to do so, not only will you be forced to wear an Arsenal shirt in Oshodi
but you will also have to wear a Man Utd shirt at Balogun.

Ako,
I have checked and re-checked the legislation regarding appeals from the AIT.
I have also discussed it with a couple of esteemed colleagues. I can find no reference
to this 56 day policy you refer to. Perhaps you can point me and others to the legislation
governing this. I am posting the relevant section of the AIT rules and procedure which is clear as
to how much time either party has to make an application for permission to appeal.

Applications for permission to appeal to the appropriate appellate court



Applying for permission to appeal
34. - (1) An application to the Tribunal under this Section must be made by filing with the Tribunal an application notice for permission to appeal.

(2) The application notice for permission to appeal must -



(a) be in the appropriate prescribed form;

(b) state the grounds of appeal; and

(c) be signed by the applicant or his representative, and dated.


(3) If the application notice is signed by the applicant's representative, the representative must certify in the application notice that he has completed the application notice in accordance with the applicant's instructions.

(4) As soon as practicable after an application notice for permission to appeal is filed, the Tribunal must notify the other party to the appeal to the Tribunal that it has been filed.

Time limit for application
35. - (1) In application notice for permission to appeal must be filed in accordance with rule 34 -



(a) if the applicant is in detention under the Immigration Acts when he is served with the Tribunal's determination, not later than 5 days after he is served with that determination;

(b) in any other case, not later than 10 days after he is served with the Tribunal's determination.
(2) The Tribunal may not extend the time limits in paragraph (1).

Nothing by the sounds of it.

Another white elephant perhaps?

Hi all,

Boy some fireworks have sure been happening whilst I have been away.

I see you are all still debating about the time limit for a notice of appeal to the
AIT despite my previous post on the matter. Anyway for the avoidance of any
further doubt I am now posting the relevant legislative provision from the AIT
rules and procedure together with the link. I hope this clarifies matters once and for
all. (Funky take note )

Time limit for appeal
     7.  - (1) A notice of appeal by a person who is in the United Kingdom must be given -



(a) if the person is in detention under the Immigration Acts when he is served with notice of the decision against which he is appealing, not later than 5 days after he is served with that notice; and

(b) in any other case, not later than 10 days after he is served with notice of the decision.


    (2) A notice of appeal by a person who is outside the United Kingdom must be given -



(a) if the person -


(i) was in the United Kingdom when the decision against which he is appealing was made; and

(ii) may not appeal while he is the United Kingdom by reason of a provision of the 2002 Act,


not later than 28 days after his departure from the United Kingdom; or

(b) in any other case, not later than 28 days after he is served with notice of the decision.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2005/20050230.htm#7

@Big Bumper and all,

It appears here that the countdown for the period of appeal is somewhat
contentious with various dates and periods being given. Hopefully what I am about
to state will clear the matter up.

In my view the period for the appeal is contradictory. The notice of appeal clearly states
that the appeal form should not arrive later than 28 days after the date of the notice. Taken
in isolation this would be regardless of when the appellant receives it. However,  I have now perused
the rules and procedures of the AIT. And there it states, unlike the appeal form, that the appellant has 28 days
from the DATE OF SERVICE to submit an appeal.

I am of the view that the AIT rules govern the procedure here and not the notice.
In short Bigbumper and Pataki are correct.

Hi Funky, Pataki et al,

I haven't been posting here consistently for quite a while due to pressing
domestic matters. I do however continue to log in and observe from time
to time.

With regards to the appeal notice and time to appeal. Funky is right, countdown
starts from the date on the appeal notice. However, an appellant is always able to
file a late appeal and all one has to do is provide valid reasons why the appeal
is late. I would argue that not receiving the appeal notice due to the fault of the High
commission is a valid reason. Even if the appeal is late and the High commission does
not raise an objection to the lateness it is unlikely the AIT would reject it outright.

Hope this helps, I will try to post more often, there are plenty of other issues that have come
up on the board and I would like to address.

@Jericho

I'm am totally with Mr Pataki and Funky here.

If you go through this thread from a-z you will see that the likes of
myself, Pataki, Funky, Ako, London Cool etc have assisted fellow
forumers without the need to "advertise" what we can do. It is almost like a
public service.

If you wish to add to the number of people doing this then can I suggest you
just get on with it and cut out the long story. If this is not your intention and you
are in fact touting for business then I fear you are in the wrong place.

Funky has already warned those who may well fall for your patter.

Ibkaye,

Who dat woman on the right in the bottom picture
in your profile?

Damn she sure looks like a rough old bird.

Can't see it being a problem.
Ensure your friend has a return
ticket for a date prior to the expiration
of the visa.

Can someone please answer my query contained in the link below(post #16)

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-105918.0.html

I am aware the question doesn't have much to do with travel but as it wasn't answered in the original thread
and this is one of the most read threads I hope to get a response. Please post any answers
in the original thread.

Thanks

@Goodguy

You may wish to consider this story. It is one I have personal knowledge of so rest assured it is true.

A Nigerian guy like you had lived illegally in South Africa for several years.
He obtained a fake Lesotho passport and decided to head for the UK.
You may know that Lesotho nationals do not require visas to enter the UK.
Unfortunately for him on arrival in the UK he was detected at the airport with the fake passport.
He claimed asylum when he was caught but was prosecuted for travelling with a
false instrument. He is currently serving 6 months in one of her Majesty's jails.

Once he finishes his jail sentence his asylum claim will be heard, but in all probability
it will be refused and after that he will be on the next plane back to Naija.

Chew on this for a while and consider whether you still think the risk is worth it.

@Toyosi

Sorry to interupt things here, but would you be kind enough to have a look at this thread specifically #16
and provide me with an answer. Cheers

https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-105918.0.html

A slight digression here, but can somebody please tell me the meaning of the name

TOYOSI.

Also is it the full name or a shortened version of a longer name?

Ah Aberdeen, the granite city.

I was there in 2002 when our super eagles played Scotland
and beat them 2-0 I think. I really don't know much about
accommodation up there, though I am sure It will not be as
expensive as London. The advice Muyiwabank gave about
taking student accommodation till you find your feet sounds
quite sensible though.

As for immigration all you will need is of course your passport.
It would also be prudent to carry your letter of admission, though
it is unlikely you will be asked for this given you already have a valid
visa. There is no need for you to have a ticket (return) at all. Make sure
you don't arrive in the UK prior to the start date on your visa.

For the health requirements I suggest you check the bia.gov.uk website.

Good luck .

PS: Dat ya name na wao!!!!My mind just de wonda

May I be the first to congratulate you.!!!!

However, the information you have provided is very
scant. You have given no indication as to what country
you have receieved your visa for, in addition you haven't
said in which town or city you will be studying so advice
about accommodation can be given. Na so persin dey fail o. (LOL)

Provide this information and then I'm sure you will get loads
of helpful replies.