“A full review of your client’s application for Right of Abode in the United Kingdom has now been made. Your application for Right of Abode was issued on the basis of a birth certificate submitted in the name of Oladayo Olawanle Akinselure born03/07/1968 in London. It is noted that he later changed his name to Oladayo Alfred Akinfolarin. A subsequent investigation by another government department found a death certificate for Oladayo Olawanle Akinselure was issued on 20.10.1973. Accordingly the vignette previously issued to your client conferring right of abode has now been revoked as no evidence has been seen to establish he is entitled to right of abode in the United Kingdom undersection 2 of the Immigration Act 1971 . ….. Whilst I appreciate your client has produced a birth certificate to support his application, the Secretary of State cannot be satisfied as to his entitlement to the use of this identity as a death certificate was subsequently issued on 20.10.1973. ……”
“All those who are in this Act expressed to have the right of abode in the United Kingdom shall be free to live in, and to come and go into and from, the United Kingdom without let or hindrance except such as may be required under and in accordance with this Act to enable their right to be established or as may be otherwise lawfully imposed on any person. ”
“I can confirm that Mr Akinfolarin has no outstanding applications for Leave to Remain. His application on human rights grounds was discontinued on3 April 2014 , as he currently has Right of Abode in the UK.”
“….. The facts are rather remarkable but essentially straight forward. On3 July 1968 a child was born to a Nigerian couple living in West London. His birth was registered 9 days later. The claimant says he is that child. However, on23 October 1973 that child’s death was registered in Swansea. The death certificate records that the boy died on20 October 1973 in the local hospital. The death was reported by a Felix Fashadini, apparently a cousin of the boy, and was supported by a certificate of death signed by a Dr Joshi. The claimant says he left the United Kingdom with his mother in 1976. He grew up in Nigeria and the Gambia. 3. It is common ground between the parties that the claimant was issued with a British passport by the British High Commission in the Gambia in 1998. In 2000 the claimant changed his middle and last name by deed pole. He obtained a substitute passport in his new name, which expired on17 February 2008 . 4. In the autumn of 2008 the claimant applied for a new passport, at which point the death certificate was picked up, no doubt in the routine checks made by the department, and drawn to the attention of the claimant. There was a police investigation, but no action was taken against the claimant. 5. On23 October 2009 the Identity and Passport Service wrote to the claimant’s then solicitors refusing to issue a passport. The point taken was a simple one: until the General Register Office confirms that the death was recorded in error, and the certificate expunged, they would not issue a passport. … It goes on to make helpful suggestions about the nature of the information and evidence which the Register General might needed to be persuaded to expunge the death certificate. 6. Solicitors then acting for the claimant then wrote to the General Register Office, but provided no real evidence upon which the Registrar could act….. 7. It is axiomatic that the IPS need to be satisfied of an applicants identity before issuing a passport to a person in a given name. … 14. Ordinarily, no doubt a British citizen whose application for a passport meets the procedural requirements set out in documentation published by the Secretary of State will be granted such a passport. But the starting point must be that the applicant for the passport whether a fresh passport or renewed passport, establishes that he is who he says he is, born when and where to whom he says he was born. There is a hint in the papers that the claimant’s belief is that his death was reported maliciously because of a family dispute of some sort. The detail of that is unclear. A mechanism exists for correcting erroneous entries in the register. Understandably the Registrar General requires proper proof beyond what may be regarded as the say – so of the person concerned that an error has been made. The correspondence, and indeed the defendant’s acknowledgement of service, have suggested steps the claimant might take to garner the necessary evidence to place before the Registrar General. It is not common, in my judgment, unreasonable to expect him to do so. 15. I fully recognise that if the underlying facts are as suggested by the claimant he has been placed in an extremely difficult, indeed invidious position. He is on that hypothesis the unwitting victim of a serious fraud, indeed a very serious criminal offence, committed in 1973. But, in my judgment, the Secretary of State is entitled to be cautious about issuing a passport to an individual when such a serious question mark hangs over his identity. Indeed, there would be something more than discordant about the Secretary of State issuing a passport to somebody in respect of whom official documentation has recorded his death. 16. It seems to me that the claim as advanced originally and as now advanced has no legal merit. That is not to say that I do not sympathise with the claimant in which he finds himself. It seems to me that he needs to sit down carefully and consider the steps he should take to garner the necessary evidence….”