Generate a structured brief — facts, issues, held, reasoning, and significance — for this case in seconds. Or browse the verbatim judgment via the source links below.
             We issued our first decision in this appeal on 4 September 2025. We found that the First-tier Tribunal had erred in law in dismissing Mr Diaby's appeal against the respondent's decision to deprive him of his British citizenship on grounds of fraud. We ordered that the decision on the appeal would be remade in the Upper Tribunal. The remaking hearing took place before us on 6 November and this is our decision following that hearing.
             The appellant entered the United Kingdom in 2006. He entered as a French citizen, using a French passport, the number of which ended with the digits 404 ("passport 404"). The appellant lived and worked in the United Kingdom as a French citizen for a number of years.
             On 21 June 2015, the appellant applied to naturalise as a British citizen. He stated that he was Ousmane Diaby, a French citizen of Gambian heritage who was born in Paris on 29 September 1980. He submitted passport 404 with that application. On 17 December 2015, the appellant was naturalised as a British citizen.
             In 2018, the respondent was notified by the French authorities that an "unknown person" had fraudulently obtained a French passport and identity card in the identity of Ousmane Diaby, born on 29 September 1980. The numbers for an identity card and a passport were given. The passport was passport 404.
             The respondent did not draw this to the appellant's attention until 8 February 2021, when a letter was sent to his solicitors. There followed an exchange of communications which we need not rehearse; it suffices to note that the respondent sought confirmation of the appellant's identity and nationality but the only additional evidence provided in response was a psychological assessment report by a psychologist named Kevin O'Doherty.
Auto-extracted from BAILII. Full structured brief in progress — the source links below give you the verbatim judgment in the meantime.
Multiple official and mirror sources — pick whichever loads cleanly on your network.
Common Room
0 comments · About the Common Room →
No comments yet — start the discussion.
Voted-best comments help future students and feed Caselaw's AI study tools.