Immigration Solicitors

Duncan Lewis Solicitors is representing BO, an Albanian national, in a significant legal battle before the Court of Appeal, challenging the Secretary of State’s decision to deprive him of British citizenship.

The case, BO (Albania) v Secretary of State (CA-2024-001138), raises crucial legal questions about the proper test to be applied when assessing whether deception is material to the grant of citizenship.

Background of the Case

BO, an Albanian citizen, arrived in the UK in 1999 and claimed asylum under a false identity, stating he was from Kosovo. His asylum claim was refused on 16 August 2000. However, in an administrative error, the Home Office informed Slough Social Services in September 2000 that BO had been granted exceptional leave to remain (ELR) until 16 August 2024—a status he was never actually awarded.

Upon discovering the error, the Secretary of State withdrew the supposed grant of ELR in February 2001. However, when BO challenged this, an adjudicator ruled that the Secretary of State could no longer deny him ELR despite the error. Following years of bureaucratic delays and mismanagement, BO was finally granted indefinite leave to remain (ILR) on 10 May 2006, on the basis that he had effectively completed four years with ELR. Subsequently, in September 2007, he was naturalised as a British citizen, maintaining his false Kosovo identity.

Deprivation of Citizenship and Legal Challenge

In January 2020, the Secretary of State was made aware that BO had obtained British citizenship through deception and requested proof of his claimed Kosovo nationality. In response, BO admitted to having used a false identity in both his asylum claim and his naturalisation application. As a result, under Section 40(3) of the British Nationality Act 1981, the Secretary of State deprived BO of his British citizenship on the grounds of deception. BO appealed the decision under Section 40A of the 1981 Act.

First-tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal Decisions

Before the First-tier Tribunal (FtT), BO accepted that he had used deception but argued that it was not material to his citizenship grant. He contended that his ELR and ILR were granted due to a Home Office administrative error rather than his claimed nationality. The FtT allowed his appeal, ruling that deception had not motivated the grant of British citizenship and was therefore not a material factor.

However, the Secretary of State was granted permission to appeal this decision. At the error of law hearing, the Upper Tribunal (UT) found that the FtT had misapplied the legal test. The UT ruled that the correct question was whether the Secretary of State could have exercised discretion differently had the full facts been known at the time. Consequently, the UT reversed the FtT’s decision and dismissed BO’s appeal.

Court of Appeal Proceedings

BO sought permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal (CoA) after the UT’s ruling. In November 2024, Lord Justice Dingemans granted permission, noting that the case presents an opportunity to clarify the legal test applied in such appeals. He observed:

“This case raises the issue of the proper test to be applied on an appeal to the FtT from the respondent, in circumstances where the FtT concluded on the facts that the applicant’s deception had not caused the grant of citizenship. The UT took a different approach, relying on Begum v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] AC 765. This appeal may therefore give the Court of Appeal an opportunity to consider the test to be applied on appeals to the FtT from a decision of the respondent where it may make a difference to the outcome.”

Dingemans LJ also referenced the case of Shyti v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2023] EWCA Civ 770, in which similar issues were raised, but not definitively resolved.,

Legal Representation 

Duncan Lewis Solicitors is representing BO in this complex and significant litigation. The case is being handled by Rajni Chodha, Solicitor at Duncan Lewis, with Tomor Bahja of Imperium Chambers acting as Counsel. 

Rajni Chodha is a solicitor at Duncan Lewis with extensive experience in immigration and nationality law. She specializes in complex citizenship cases and has a track record of successfully challenging Home Office decisions. 

Duncan Lewis Solicitors 

Duncan Lewis has the leading public law and immigration practice in the UK. The team frequently takes on and successfully brings challenges in some of the most high profile cases in the UK, including in relation to the Rwanda plan and Manston House. The company was crowned Law Firm of the Year 2024 at the LexisNexis awards, and noted for its commitment to providing justice for all. 

Duncan Lewis is renowned for its exceptional legal services and commitment to justice. The company employs a team of highly skilled solicitors offering top-tier representation in 25 fields of law, and ranked as top tier by the Chambers and Partners and the Legal 500 legal guides, and as one of the top 250 law firms in the country by the Times.