I&#39;m Irish but have an English birth cert. What are my rights regarding dual citizenship and getting an English passport? I'm an Irish citizen and passport holder, and both my parents are Irish, and I've lived in Ireland pretty much my whole life. But, I was born in London. My parents were living and working there in the late 80's/early 90's, and then I was born. They returned to Ireland within a couple months. Because of this, my birth cert is English. Around 2015 I smelled Brexit coming and wanted to future-proof my option to live and work in England in the event of the Ireland/UK common travel area ending. I remember ringing some English dept. (Maybe the passport office? I don't remember) and being told that I was not entitled to a passport or dual citizenship on the sole basis of being born in London. When I answered her question about my parents, and told her neither of them are English, she was instantly dismissive. In hindsight, I'm skeptical that the woman was telling me the truth, because from what I've observed in the media, birth certs are meaningful and powerful legal docs when it comes to being entitled to live and work in a country, getting a passport, dual citizenship etc. But I was only 20 at the time, so I took her word for it and forgot about it. Now that Brexit has happened, it looks like the Ireland/UK common travel area is to be maintained, so I'll ultimately have nothing to worry about. But I just want to know for sure what my rights are regarding the following: Getting an English passport Getting dual citizenship Was the lady being truthful? If I were from a 3rd country, would my birth cert be enough to allow me to live and work in the UK? (ex. common travel area)
You are a British citizen: Born in the UK between 1 January 1983 and 1 October 2000 Whether you’re a British citizen depends on where your parents were from and their circumstances. There are different rules if, when you were born: at least one of your parents was a British or Irish citizen at least one of your parents was a citizen of an EU or EEA country neither of your parents was a British, Irish, EU or EEA citizen You’re automatically a British citizen if you were adopted by a British citizen in a UK court. If at least one of your parents was a British or Irish citizen when you were born You’ll be a British citizen if when you were born at least one of your parents was either: a British citizen an Irish citizen living in the UK If the parent that meets these conditions is your father, he must have been married to your mother when you were born. Source: https://www.gov.uk/check-british-citizenship/born-in-the-uk-between-1-january-1983-and-1-october-2000 Anyway, to live and work in the UK, you don't need British citizenship, because Irish citizens automatically have that right independent of European Union law (which is why children of Irish citizens born in the UK gain British citizenship). When I answered her question about my parents, and told her neither of them are English, she was instantly dismissive. Did you tell her that they were Irish? If so, she shouldn't have been so dismissive. If she was, then she was wrong. But I just want to know for sure what my rights are regarding the following: getting an English passport As a British citizen, you are generally entitled to a British passport. getting dual citizenship Legally speaking, you already have it. was the lady being truthful She was probably not lying. She probably said what she said because she misunderstood the facts or the law. if I were from a 3rd country, would my birth cert be enough to allow me to live and work in the UK? (Ex. common travel area) Ireland has different rules, but the UK does not have, as others have noted, absolute _jus soli _ If you had been from a third country, you would have been a British citizen only if your parents had had indefinite leave to remain.
Being automaticly citizens of the US and Uruguay, causes no problem with your German citizenship. For Uruguay, you are appling for recognition of your citizenship at birth as a grandchild of a Uruguayan citizen. Only when you, as an adult, apply for nationisation (i.e. that country considers you to be a foreigner at the time of the application) would you lose your German citizenship automaticly when this application has been granted, unless you apply for an exception beforhand. Such an exception would only be granted when you can prove that you still have strong ties to Germany.
Basically: what Flup said in his last paragraph (and so upvoted accordingly). Every one of the practitioners you named has an undergraduate degree from the UK, and an undergraduate degree from Canada. This, presumably, is because you're not permitted to practise law in most jurisdictions unless you have some kind of qualification in the law of that particular jurisdiction. The laws of each country, and moreover, the way in which cases are decided and in which each country's legal system works, varies so tremendously that you need to study the particulars for each jurisdiction before you can practice there. Regarding Canada: from this site: You must complete a Bachelor of Laws (L.L.B.) program or Juris Doctor (J.D.) program in order to qualify for bar membership in any Canadian province or territory. This generally takes three years to complete. In England and Wales, you can now take a law conversion course in place of an undergraduate law degree as a first stage towards being qualified. I suspect, however, looking at the dates of the judges you list, that the law conversion course wasn't an option at the time they got their qualifications, so their only option was a full undergraduate course. So the answer is: they each have two undergraduate qualifications, one from each jurisdiction, so that they could qualify to practise law in both jurisdictions.
Assuming, for purposes of argument, that such a change could be made by executive order, or indeed by legislation, rather than by amendment, yes, the change could and would have to have an effective date, and apply only to persons born after that date. Indeed that would still be true if such a change were made by constitutional amendment. Consider, people whose parents (or one of whose parents) are US citizens, but who are born outside of the US, are or may become citizens (by statute), but only if the citizen parent complies with certain rules specifying a minimum period of residence in the US, and other conditions. Those periods and conditions have changed over the years, and each such change had an effective date. If such a change could be made but could not be made with an effective date, then it would apply retroactively, and deprive people who are already citizens of their citizenship. There is no valid equal protection claim, because the same rules apply to both individuals, they merely give different results for the different birth dates. (See my answer to this question for why I do not think such a change would be valid except by Constitutional Amendment.) EDIT: I suppose such a changed interpretation, if made at all, might take the position that such births never did validly convey citizen ship, and all people whose parents were not validly in the country had never been citizens. That strikes me as even less likely to pass judicial review, but one cannot know what the Supreme Court will do when faced with a truly novel situation.
If you simply moved to the US, nothing more, then nothing would have disturbed your Romanian citizenship. Even if you became a US citizen and officially renounced your Romanian citizenship, under the Romanian constitution Art 5(2) &quot;Romanian citizenship cannot be withdrawn if acquired by birth&quot;. It's yours for life.
You do not have to prove that you are an EU citizen, because EU citizenship is entirely irrelevant to the GDPR. Have a look at Article 3, which basically says that GDPR applies if you are in the EU or if the company is in the EU. If the company is in the EU, therefore, you do not need to send them anything or prove anything about yourself to invoke GDPR. If the company is outside the EU, you can send proof of address or other evidence that you are in the EU, which might be something that they already have, like your IP address.
For the US, the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act provides that just about any US citizen living abroad who has previously resided within the US is entitled to vote in federal elections as though they still lived at their last US address, provided they'd be eligible to vote if they still lived at that address. If you're overseas on duty in a uniformed service of the United States or as a spouse or dependent of such a person, it's based on your legal residence instead. This is a right of US citizenship; dual citizenship doesn't affect it. This State Department website has details; there's a special process you can generally use instead of the state absentee process. UOCAVA applies to all federal elections (including primaries); state and local election eligibility is up to the state. For Canada, citizens of Canada living there seem to have the right to vote regardless of any possible loyalty issues with another country. Canadians living outside Canada for over five years can't vote, but if you live there it seems as though it is allowed. So, the answer is seemingly "yes." For a definitive answer, contact the US consulate and Canadian election officials.
england-and-wales Yes, double jeopardy applies The common law pleas of autrefois acquit and autrefois convict apply equally to foreign offences; this is black letter law in Halsbury's Laws of England. Scotland is &quot;foreign&quot; for these purposes. There is no analogue to the odd US dual sovereignty doctrine. The general exception to double jeopardy regarding the re-trial of serious offences under Part 10 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 does not apply here, because of an odd anomaly created by the statute due to criminal justice being devolved to the Scottish Parliament. As a result, according to the Crown Prosecution Service: There are no provisions dealing with qualifying offences [for retrial after acquittal] in Scotland as criminal justice is a matter for the Scottish Parliament. At present, the law in Scotland has not been changed so that these provisions do not apply to acquittals that take place in Scotland.