HOME OFFICE
Lunar House Wellesley Road Croydon CR9 2BY Telephone (Immigration) or-686 0688 Calls answered in rotation
(National XXXXXXXXXXXƒˇplease await reply
J N Powell Esq
Hong Kong Department
FILE
cc Mur thill
01-760 2829
246
legal adviso
Me Grings...
Has reale, N+TD
Grateful for cy
de. 97.
Comvents.
Please reply to The Under Secretary of State Your reference
Foreign and Commonwealth Office
Our reference
NTY/85 1/387/2
London
SW1A 2AH
Date
2 July 1985
HKK RECHIVEO
040/4.
10 JUL 1985
Dear Jonathon,
HONG KONG:
"MIXED" AND "SEPARATE" BDTCS
יך
รา
At our meeting on 1 July I promised to write to you about our further research. into the question of "mixed" and "separate" BDTCs.
I now attach three tables listing those categories of persons born after 1 January 1983 who have a combination of links with Hong Kong and another dependent territory, together with our views as to their "mixed" or "separate" status. Because of my imminent departure on three weeks leave I thought it best to get these to you this week, rather than await my return on 29 July. For this reason I am afraid I have not had time to check the tables in detail.
For reasons similar to those set out in paragraph 7 of my letter of 17 June we do not consider it possible for anyone born before 1 January 1983 to have a truly "mixed" link with Hong Kong Before 1983 birth alone in Hong Kong conferrea CUKC status, irrespective of the nationality or immigration status of the parents. Therefore no-one born in Hong Kong before 1983 had to depend on a connection with any other dependent territory or with the UK to derive CUKC (and consequently BDTC) status. Anyone born in Hong Kong before 1983 was therefore a "separate" Hong Kong PDTC.
Birth outside the UK and Colonies before 1983 conferred CUKC by descent only if the child's father was a CUKC other than by descent (or, if by descent, if any of the provisos to section 5(1) of the BNA 1948 applied). Since the father's status could not be derived from a mixed" link (even Consular birth registration through a number of generations can eventually be traced back to a single "unmixed" link), neither could the child's. A CUKC by descent from a Hong Kong father must therefore also have had an "unmixed" link with Hong Kong.
As to registration and naturalisation outside Hong Kong, our views are set out in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the commentary on the draft Order, and paragraphs 2 and 3 of the note on the Hong Kong proposals which we have not taken up.
We should be grateful to have your views on the attached tables, and to know whether (and if so why) you consider any of the categories listed should be excepted from loss of BDTC in 1997.
I am copying this letter to colleagues here.
घ् Evy.
J P EMERY
Nationality Division