“A person born in the United Kingdom… who is not a British citizen… shall be entitled, on an application for his registration as a British citizen made at any time after he has attained the age of ten years, to be registered as such a citizen if, as regards each of the first ten years of that person’s life, the number of days on which he was absent from the United Kingdom in that year does not exceed 90.”
“The Home Office must ensure that there are sufficient resources to control migration for the benefit of the UK in a way that achieves value for money for the taxpayer. Government intervention is necessary to ensure a balanced budget… The specific policy objective of this legislation is to generate sufficient income to ensure the Home Office has a balanced budget for the financial year 2014-15. This will enable the Home Office to run a sustainable immigration system – making timely, correct decisions on who may visit and stay and deterring, stopping or removing those who have no right to be here – in a way that achieves value for money for the taxpayer. Policy objectives on immigration and nationality fees are: (1) that those who benefit directly from our immigration system (migrants, employers and educational institutions) contribute towards meeting its costs, reducing the contribution from the taxpayer; (2) that the fees system is simplified where possible, aligning fees where entitlements are similar; (3) that fees are set fairly, at a level that reflects the value of a successful application to those who use the service.”
“… a person shall not be registered under any provision of this Act as a citizen of any description… unless… any fee payable by virtue of this Act in connection with the registration… has been paid…”
“Any provision in this Act which provides for a person to be entitled to registration as a citizen of any description… shall have effect subject to the preceding provisions of this section.”
“A person shall not be registered under a provision of this Act as a citizen of any description… unless any fee payable by virtue of this Act in connection with registration has been paid.”
“51. Fees (1) The Secretary of State may by order require an application or claim in connection with immigration or nationality (whether or not under an enactment) to be accompanied by a specified fee. (2) The Secretary of State may by order provide for a fee to be charged by him, by an immigration officer or by another specified person in respect of – (a) the provision on request of a service (whether or not under an enactment) in connection with immigration or nationality, (b) a process (whether or not under an enactment) in connection with immigration or nationality… (3) Where an order under this section provides for a fee to be charged, regulations made by the Secretary of State – (a) shall specify the amount of the fee, (b) may provide for exceptions, (c) may confer a discretion to reduce, waive or refund all or part of a fee, (d) may make provision about the consequences of failure to pay a fee, (e) may make provision about enforcement, and (f) may make provision about the time or period of time at or during which a fee may or must be paid. … 52. Fees: supplemental … (3) An order or regulations under section 51 – (a) may make provision generally or only in respect of specified cases or circumstances, (b) may make different provision for different cases or circumstances, (c) may include incidental, consequential or transitional provision, and (d) shall be made by statutory instrument. (4) An order under section 51 – (a) may be made only with the consent of the Treasury, and (b) may be made only if a draft has been laid before and approved by resolution of each House of Parliament. (5) Regulations under section 51 – (a) may be made only with the consent of the Treasury, and (b) shall be subject to annulment in pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.”
“7.1 The fees contained in these regulations are set above the administrative cost of providing the application, process or service in line with the government’s flexible charging model. Charging fees above the cost of administration helps raise the revenue required to fund the immigration system and to cross-subsidise fees set below cost for immigration routes where a lower fee supports government objectives. As a direct result of the fees referred to in this instrument, the UK Border Agency is able to generate sufficient income to support the immigration system, maintain public confidence and ensure that migration is controlled for the benefit of the UK. 7.2 The UK Border Agency aims to generate an appropriate contribution to its agreed running costs from the income generated from visa, nationality and immigration applications. By doing this, the Agency seeks to reduce the financial obligation on the UK taxpayer to subsidise the immigration system. It is also able to protect certain routes from significant fee increases while generating the additional revenue needed to fund enforcement and other necessary improvements to the immigration system.”
“No fee is payable in respect of an application made in respect of a person who, at the time of making the application is a child and is being provided with assistance by a local authority.”
“Where these Regulations specify a fee which must accompany an application for the purposes of the 2011 [Fees] Order, the application is not validly made unless it is accompanied by the specified fee.”
“(1) Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence. (2) There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”
“The enjoyment of the rights and freedoms set forth in this Convention shall be secured without discrimination on any ground such as sex, race, colour, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, association with a national minority, property, birth or other status.”
“A request for waiver of a fee in respect of an application for entry clearance which would normally be due is a request for a substantive benefit which entails the State having to bear some cost. A person who applies for a waiver of the normal fee will be entitled to such waiver if he can show (i) that he falls within some statement of policy by the Secretary of State regarding the circumstances in which a waiver will be granted, or (ii) that there are other compelling circumstances of his case not referred to in any statement of policy that ought to be taken into account by the Secretary of State (see [R (Elmi) v Secretary of State for the Home Department[2010] EWHC 2775 (Admin) ] at [43]-[44]) and that, taking such matters into account, it would be irrational for the Secretary of State to refuse to grant a waiver, or (iii) that there is a duty on the Secretary of State under section 6(1) of the [Human Rights Act] to grant a waiver, by reference to Convention rights (here, article 8 is relied upon). The person applying for a waiver may also be entitled to judicial review of a decision to refuse such waiver, so as to compel a reconsideration of that decision, if he can show that any of the usual grounds of judicial review (such as failure to take into account relevant considerations, or that irrelevant considerations have been taken into account) are made out.”
“Applicants will qualify for a fee waiver only where they can demonstrate on the basis of evidence provided that they are destitute, or where there are exceptional circumstances.”
“The requirements to be met by an applicant for leave to remain on the grounds of private life in the UK are that at the date of application, the applicant: … (iv) is under the age of 18 years and has lived continuously in the UK for at least 7 years (discounting any period of imprisonment) and it would not be reasonable to expect the applicant to leave the UK.”
“… as your application does not have the correct fee of£673.00 it has been rejected. The fee is prescribed by law and there is no discretion to waive the fee or to accept a lesser amount, irrespective of the particular circumstances of the applicant. The prescribed fee must accompany the application in order for the application to be valid. … For any further action to be considered you will need to resubmit a fresh application with all supporting documentation and correct fee using the payment slip aside.”
“That submission would be good in a context which does not touch fundamental constitutional rights. But I do not think it can run here. Access to the courts is a constitutional right; it can only be denied by the government if it persuades Parliament to pass legislation which specifically – in effect by express provision – permits the executive to turn people away from the court door. That has not been done in this case.”
“The principle is undisputed. Subsidiary legislation must not only be drawn as not to be within the vires of the enabling statute but must also be so drawn as not to conflict with statutory rights already enacted by other primary legislation.”
“… [W]hen a statutory instrument has been reviewed by Parliament, respect for Parliament’s constitutional function calls for considerable caution before the court will hold it to be unlawful on some ground (such as irrationality) which is within the ambit of Parliament’s review. This applies with special force to legislative instruments founded on considerations of general policy.”
“It is also to be noted that the 2013 Regulations are concerned with a classic issue of general policy involving decisions about the use of resources and the extent to which the UK taxpayer should subsidise the immigration system: see paragraph 7 of the Explanatory Memorandum and the evidence of Mr Sparks. How the various competing interests are to be balanced is quintessentially a political and legislative decision.”
“Even if article 8 of the [ECHR] does not guarantee a right to acquire a particular nationality, it remains that nationality is an element of personal identity.”
“In these circumstances I am satisfied that the Claimant’s claim that he was denied British nationality because of his illegitimate status is within the ambit of article 8. This is because the claim involves the Claimant’s social identity, as a person entitled to stay in the United Kingdom, as the child of a British father…”
“44. The [ECHR] decision in Genovese v Malta[2012] FLR 10 [to which Dingemans J also referred in Johnson], concerned the refusal of Maltese citizenship to a child born out of wedlock to the British mother but with a Maltese father. A child born out of wedlock could only be granted Maltese citizenship if born to a Maltese mother. The court repeated what it had often said before to the effect that article 8, and indeed the ECHR as a whole, did not guarantee a right to acquire a particular nationality, but “an arbitrary denial of citizenship might in certain circumstances raise an issue under article 8”