Hong Kong British National (Overseas)

The Hong Kong British National Overseas (BN(O)) visa route permits individuals who hold BN(O) nationality status, and specified family members, to come to the UK through an uncapped and unsponsored visa route.

BN(O) nationality status provides access only to consular assistance and protection from UK diplomatic posts. Holding BN(O) status does not confer an automatic right of abode (ie to live, work and study in the UK) and such individuals are still subject to UK immigration controls. The BN(O) visa route therefore offers an important opportunity for those with BN(O) status to gain enhanced rights to reside and work/study in the UK.

The route is open to two types of main applicant:

  1. BN(O) Status Holder, who must hold BN(O) status under the Hong Kong (British Nationality) Order, SI 1986/948, and

  2. BN(O) Household Member, who must be

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Immigration News

Immigration—Windrush—non-fettering public law principle—section 31(2A) Senior Courts Act 1981 (Hippolyte v SSHD)

Immigration analysis: The Court of Appeal allowed an appeal of the High Court’s refusal of judicial review in respect of the respondent Secretary of State’s refusal to grant the applicant indefinite leave to remain (ILR) under the Windrush Scheme. The Home Office’s casework guidance states that the child of a Commonwealth citizen who was settled in the UK before 1 January 1971 must have been continuously resident in the UK since their birth or arrival to qualify under the scheme. The applicant asked the Secretary of State to exercise discretion to waive this requirement, as she had sufficient close ties to the UK that she fell within the ‘spirit’ of the Windrush Scheme. The Home Office failed to consider whether to exercise discretion and the appellant argued that the Home Office had fettered its discretion. The case concerned two key issues: (1) whether the Secretary of State contravened the ‘non-fettering’ principle in public law by failing to exercise her discretion under section 3(1)(b) Immigration Act 1971, which confers a wide discretion on the Home Office to grant leave even where the requirements of the Immigration Rules or published policy guidance are not met, and (2) whether the High Court was wrong to refuse relief under section 31(2A) Senior Courts Act 1981 (SCA 1981), which applies where it is highly likely that the outcome for the claimant would not have been substantially different had the conduct complained of not occurred. Written by Gill McKearney, knowledge lawyer at Bates Wells.

View Immigration by content type :

Popular documents