D5 and others (Appellants) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent)

Case summary

Case ID

UKSC/2025/0186

Parties

Appellant(s)

(1) D5 (2) D6 (3) D7

Respondent(s)

Secretary of State for the Home Department

Issue

In an appeal against a decision to deprive an individual of their British Citizenship under section 40 of the British Nationality Act 1981 on the ground that it is “conducive to the public good”, does the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (“SIAC”) have to take a separate approach where the deprivation decision was based on criminal conduct, particularly serious organised crime, rather than the individual’s risk to national security?

Facts

These appeals both concern the deprivation of British Citizenship from individuals with connections to serious organised crime. C9 was an Albanian national who became a British citizen in 2007, relying on misrepresentations concerning his name and nationality. In 2018, the Secretary of State for the Home Department, the Respondent, wrote to C9 stating that they were considering depriving C9 of British Citizenship on the basis that C9 had concealed a material fact. In September 2020, C9 was notified that the Respondent had decided to deprive them of citizenship on the ground that this would be “conducive to the public good”. The National Crime Agency (the “NCA”) had claimed that C9 had been involved in serious organised crime within the UK, including money laundering, illegal drug dealing, and firearm access. The deprivation order was made whilst C9 was outside of the UK on a short trip. D5, D6, and D7 are all nationals of Afghanistan, being two brothers (D6 and D7) and their uncle (D5), who claimed asylum and were naturalised as British citizens. In August, the NCA had informed the Respondent that D7 was assessed to be involved in serious organised crime (including trafficking for labour exploitation and being a member of a group that was involved with money laundering and sexual exploitation). In September 2020, when D7 was outside the UK, the Respondent decided to exclude D7 from the UK on the grounds that it would be conducive to the public good. Following similar allegations from the NCA concerning D5 and D6, in November 2020, when D5 and D6 were outside the UK, the Respondent deprived them of their British Citizenship on the grounds that it would be conducive to the public good because of their involvement with serious organised crime. C9 and D5 and D6 appealed against their respective deprivation decisions to SIAC (whilst D7’s appeal took the form of a judicial review). In both cases, SIAC dismissed their appeals. The parties appealed to the Court of Appeal who directed that both appeals should be combined due to raising similar issues. The Court of Appeal subsequently dismissed their appeals. The Appellants now seek to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Date of issue

10 November 2025

Case origin

PTA

Linked cases

Back to top