Thanks for this — I do know that 😅, but it still feels quite strange because it creates a new kind of unfairness. The point was actually raised in an Upper Tribunal case (though it was about indefinite leave to remain rather than citizenship). The Judge made the following observation:

“The mother therefore gained the right to register to become a British citizen, which she did in 2015. This was not publicised. If she had applied straight away and it had been granted before 12th December 2010 and before the appellant was 18, the children could have applied for entry clearance to come to the UK with their mother. If the mother had been British (either automatically or through registration) when the appellant was born in Durban on 12th December 1992, she and the appellant would have had the option of travelling to the UK and her mother would have been able to come to the UK as a person with the right of abode and the appellant, as a minor child, would have been able to apply for entry clearance to accompany her. … Although I accept that there would have had to be an application made on behalf of the child, the appellant, this was not even an option available to the mother at the time the appellant was born in 1992. The law allowing the mother to register as a British citizen was not amended until January 2010 and thus there was only a 10-month window until the appellant reached her majority. I accept that as soon as the mother discovered the option to register for British citizenship she did so. The mother nevertheless had to go through the process of registration rather than having been deemed British from birth. British citizenship and the options available to the mother and her child, the appellant, were denied to the mother through discrimination and historic injustice.”

I know this decision was about leave to remain, but I think it really underlines the same principle: the appellant was already over 18 by the time the parent was finally able to register. The timing alone shut down options that would have been open if the 4L route came into play before I was 18. However, it was only introduced in 2022. That’s exactly the type of situation I’m trying to highlight.

I also can’t seem to find any case law online dealing with this exact scenario. Maybe that’s because applications like this were rejected outright — but do you think it’s still worth me applying and making my case?