Talk:British Nationality Act 1981

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Defining citizenship is fundamental to the constitution of any state. This statute is a fundamental piece of constitutional law in the UK. Therefore it belongs in Category:Constitutional laws of the United Kingdom. --Mais oui! 10:23, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree with you on this I'm afraid. The constitutional laws relate to how the country is governed, not nationality. In any case most of the provisions in the act are no longer in force. I suggest you read some the Constitution of the United Kingdom article which defines the applicable laws that should be in that category as I noticed you also put various other Acts in which are not considered constitutional laws. Remember you can always ask a more experienced wikipedian if you are not sure by leaving a message on their talk page. Regards Astrotrain 13:20, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In some countries, such as the Republic of Ireland and United States there are specific constitutional provisions that affect citizenship entitlement. This is not the case in the United Kingdom (and most countries), British nationality law is more a matter of administrative rather than constitutional law. JAJ 00:38, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Birth in the United Kingdom[edit]

In reference to: Prior to the Act coming into force, the vast majority of those born in Britain, (with limited exceptions such as children of diplomats) were entitiled to British Citizenship, after the Act came into force, citizenship was generally transmitted by the parents.

This is not correct. Even after the Act came into force, the vast majority of UK born children are still British citizens by birth. This is because the parents do not need to be British citizens, permanent residence in the United Kingdom is sufficient. I have amended the comment accordingly. JAJ 04:38, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Falklands[edit]

Argentina was claiming the Falklands long before 1982. The law of 1981 is unlikely to have had much influence on the claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.65.2.139 (talk) 16:35, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]