We were recently instructed by a client seeking to make a fresh application for British citizenship following a previous refusal. This case ultimately resulted in citizenship granted after refusal, despite serious allegations raised by the Home Office. The client held indefinite leave to remain and was married to a British citizen, thereby qualifying to apply for naturalisation under section 6(2) of the British Nationality Act 1981.
The client initially entered the UK on a spouse visa and, after completing the relevant qualifying period on the partner route, successfully obtained indefinite leave to remain. Prior to securing indefinite leave, she undertook the Life in the UK test. She did not pass on her first attempt and therefore rebooked the test at an alternative test centre. During the security process at that centre, concerns were raised by staff before the test commenced, and the client was asked to leave.
The client subsequently retook and passed the Life in the UK test at a different approved test centre. This result was accepted by the Home Office in support of her successful application for indefinite leave to remain.
At the beginning of 2024, the client’s first application for British citizenship was refused. The Home Office concluded that she did not meet the good character requirement, citing an alleged abuse of the Life in the UK or English language testing process and an alleged attempt to mislead a government department through the submission of fraudulent documents. The Home Office subsequently clarified that no concerns had been raised regarding the client’s English language test.
A reconsideration request was submitted shortly after the refusal but was unsuccessful. The client was subsequently misadvised by another firm to lodge an appeal with the First-tier Tribunal. As there is no statutory right of appeal against a refusal of British citizenship, the appeal was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds. The client remained unaware of these procedural limitations until she instructed our firm early last year.
Home Office Guidance – Deception in Previous Applications
The relevant Home Office guidance makes clear that an application will normally be refused where there is evidence that a person has employed deception either during the citizenship application process or in a previous immigration application within the preceding 10 years. The guidance further states that it is irrelevant whether the deception was material to the grant of leave, and that any deception is regarded as continuing until the date on which it is discovered or admitted.
This represents a significant hurdle for any applicant, as the Home Office is entitled to treat alleged past irregularities as a serious factor weighing against the grant of citizenship. In our client’s case, the previous refusal was framed by the Home Office as an allegation of deception, which placed her fresh application in a high-risk discretionary category.
Our involvement (what we did)
At the outset, we advised the client that a fresh citizenship application would be discretionary and that the matter presented challenges in light of the previous allegation of deception. We explained that submitting a fresh application would allow for full reconsideration of the evidence and preserve the option of pursuing judicial review if necessary. Notwithstanding these challenges, our primary objective was to prepare the strongest possible application and invite the Secretary of State to exercise discretion favourably.
Upon receipt and analysis of the disclosed material, we prepared comprehensive legal representations addressing each statutory requirement for naturalisation, with particular emphasis on the good character assessment. The application was supported by extensive documentary evidence, including employment and tax records demonstrating sustained lawful activity in the UK and multiple independent character references from individuals with long-standing knowledge of the client.
We also provided corroborative evidence addressing the specific allegation relied upon in the previous refusal, including correspondence from relevant test providers, disclosure material obtained through the subject access request, and contextual evidence explaining the circumstances of the disputed incident. In addition, we relied on the fact that the client’s successful Life in the UK test had already been accepted by the Home Office when granting indefinite leave to remain, which significantly undermined the basis of the earlier adverse finding.
The application was submitted in late 2025, accompanied by detailed legal representations and a structured bundle of supporting documents. We specifically requested that the application be reviewed by a senior caseworker in light of the legal issues raised.
Outcome
The application was granted just over three months after submission.
Conclusion
This case underscores the importance of meticulous legal analysis and strategic preparation in British citizenship applications, particularly where allegations of deception or adverse character findings have previously been made. It demonstrates that, with robust evidence, well-structured legal submissions, and a clear understanding of Home Office discretion, it is possible to successfully challenge adverse conclusions and secure a positive outcome for eligible applicants.
Have questions? Get in touch today!
Call our office on 020 7928 0276, we will be taking calls from 9:30am to 6:00pm.
Email us on info@lisaslaw.co.uk.
Or, use the contact form on our website. Simply enter your details and leave a message, we will get right back to you: https://lisaslaw.co.uk/contact/
For more updates, follow us on our social media platforms! You can find them all on our Linktree right here.
