Connect with us
Connect with us
Are you planning to sponsor your loved one for Canadian PR? What are the key elements to look out for to make sure your application is not refused? Today we will be reviewing these details together with actual case studies.
If you are a Canadian citizen and Canadian PR, you can sponsor your common-law or spouse or conjugal partner for Canadian PR. Your spouse or partner can either be overseas or inside Canada. But beware, if you are in a common-law relationship, and you are not physically together, this can be a red flag for IRCC and create issues for you during the sponsorship process.
If you’re interested in applying for the Canada PR through the Spousal Sponsorship program, at INGWE we are here to help you. We have successfully supported applicants from +47 nationalities! Get a FREE assessment with us, click here.
Here are some key highlights about this program before we dive deep into some case studies together:
* Canadian family sponsorship is one of the most effective programs for PR processing. With the huge backlog from IRCC, they have always prioritized all categories of family sponsorship, especially spousal and dependent children.
* Unless you live in Quebec, there is no minimum income requirement to sponsor your partner or spouse (keep in mind that you should not be on social welfare, unless it’s for disability support). There is no language, minimum asset or education requirements. Keep in mind again that any serious criminality on behalf of the sponsor can make you ineligible to sponsor.
* Even if your spouse or partner is completely out of status inside Canada, even for years, you can convert them from inside Canada to a PR legally.
* You could be a Canadian citizen living abroad with your spouse or common-law and sponsor them from outside, but with the intention and proof that you will return to Canada as a full-time resident.
* The genuineness of the relationship and supporting documents is the most important factor for IRCC when processing any of these types of sponsorships.
* Canada does recognize arranged marriages based on your cultural and religious backgrounds, however they do not recognize proxy relationships (i.e., not in person) or polygamy (having multiple spouses) even if it’s accepted in your own culture. They also don’t recognize marriages with minors, even if in your own home country this is allowed.
* The biggest difference with the US program for spousal sponsorship is that they don’t recognize conjugal or common-law relationships for immigration purposes, and a minimum income is required as a sponsor no matter where you are in the US. As well, in the US you cannot sponsor somebody from inside the country without status.
* Right now, the typical processing time we are seeing is anywhere from 5 months to 12 months for typical cases - to apply and receive a decision and PR processing for your sponsored spouse or partner. Some regions in Africa can take longer. If an interview is involved, it could also lengthen the process.
* Work permits for sponsored spouses or common-law partners from inside Canada are taking anywhere from 4.5 to 5 months. Remember that you cannot apply for a work permit under this program if you are outside Canada or are out of status from inside Canada.
If you’re thinking about immigrating to Canada through Sponsorship, we are here to support you throughout the process. We have licensed immigration consultants and specialized education advisors that are willing to help. Get a FREE assessment with us if you want to study in Canada, click here.
The best way to understand if your case is strong enough to pass the test of IRCC in terms of genuineness of the relationship and for them not to state that you (the person being sponsored) went into this relationship purely to gain status in Canada (which is termed by the IRCC as a ‘relationship of convenience’) is to actually review actual cases of refusals and understand the decision making process & reasoning of the IRCC officers. This is why we will be reviewing a few cases today for you to extract key information to help you make a better application during your sponsorship process:
As a disclaimer, these were not our clients, and this information is publicly posted on Canlii website as actual cases in Canadian federal courts. Anyone has access to these. We are using them as case studies to inform and educate our audience.
Harpreet Singh v Canada
PA: Harpreet Singh got married through arranged marriage in India. Soon after, his wife, Mrs. Kaur received approval for SP to study in Canada. Harpreet applied for SOWP to join his wife in Canada twice. Once in Jan 2019 (interviewed in Jan) and another in March 2019 (interviewed in May 2019).
His second application was again, refused.
Notes from officer: Upon review of your application, previous interview and current interview, I have noted discrepancies in the information you have provided (ex: whether an engagement occurred or not, the dates of your first meeting and when you declared your spouse applied for her study permit). Because the truthfulness of this information forms a key part of your reason for entering Canada on a spousal open work permit, I am concerned that this misrepresentation was liable to induce an error in the administration of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and that you are therefore inadmissible to Canada for misrepresentation.
The applicant’s evidence of a chat history with Mrs. Kaur following their wedding also does not disclose that the couple exchanged substantive communication about their daily activities, their future plans, their career aspirations, or any other elements of an anticipated shared life together.
When asked about what he knew about his spouse, the Applicant could only reply that she likes ice cream and “to go around places”. These responses do not disclose that the Applicant has learned anything of substance about his wife.
Key points:
* Although this is a SOWP application, keep in mind that similarly, for genuineness of marriage/relationships is crucial for any application concerning your spouse/partner.
* Similarly to SOWP, you will also be interviewed for spousal sponsorship application, it is crucial to be truthful and answer in a way that is clear, concise, and easy to understand.
* It is your responsibility to provide enough information for the officer to make the decision
Battu v. Canada
Refusal reason: Applicant seeks JD review of a decision by the IAD. IRCC believed the applicant’s husband’s primary purpose for entering the relationship was to obtain immigration status in Canada.
Argument: IAD failed to consider relevant evidence of the primary purpose for entering the relationship and failed to examine the portion of the evidence that addresses the genuineness of the marriage
Applicant is 49yr old Canadian (2 adult children from previous marriage) who married Mr. Gill (32yr old Indian national) in Feb 2019.
Potential red flag to the officer:
* Before the marriage, Mr. Gill had a history of making 9 TRV applications which were all refused between Oct 2013 to June 2018
* They met when applicant travelled to India in Oct 2018
* They had a private wedding where no families attended – they then lived together in India for 2 weeks before the applicant came back to Canada
They both attended interviews on Nov 3, 2019, later received refusal letter on Jan 3,2020
Reasons for refusal:
* Mr. Gill’s intentions in entering the marriage given his nine previous TRV applications to Canada,
* Mr. Gill’s insufficient personal knowledge of the Applicant
* a lack of compatibility in terms of age and marital history
* the Applicant’s credibility based on the secrecy of the marriage and a related police protection order (“likely obtained to explain the lack of participation of [Mr. Gill]’s family in the development of the relationship and wedding rather than a result of a genuine fear of his family).
Reason JD review was granted:
* IAD placed too much weight on Mr. Gill’s TRV applications and his motivation to come to Canada. “Most individuals seeking to come to Canada are highly motivated to do so. This says little about whether a particular marriage is genuine” (at para 19).
* IAD’s finding that the police protection order was obtained to provide an excuse for the lack of family presence at the wedding is not justified. I find that the testimonies showed that the couple was concerned their decision to marry could spark an unpredictable response from Mr. Gill’s family. Specifically, Mr. Gill testified that he obtained the petition for a police protection order because he feared his family would disapprove of the marriage due to their significant age difference. I also find that the objective country condition evidence of violence from families in India towards couples who married under similar circumstances demonstrates that this fear was genuine and reasonable.
* Given the evidence before the IAD, such as the extensive communication between the Applicant and Mr. Gill before their marriage, the statement from the Applicant’s children, and the couple’s hesitancy to involve their families in the wedding for fear that they would disapprove, I do not find that the IAD adequately accounted for the context of the Applicant and Mr. Gill’s lives when analyzing the development of their relationship
Key take away:
* Always request for ATIP notes if you receive a refusal to fully understand why your application was refused
* Visa officers are human, no matter how hard they try, it is hard to be without bias. If you have a record of refusals, it’s important to present information with more than the minimum required supporting documents. Organize your application package so that it is easy to review and, if you want to appeal the decision, you have provided more than enough documents to support your case
This one is a bit more of a complicated case, again not our client, but good for everyone to understand that being transparent and truthful is important in all applications.
Clarke v. Canada
Applicant: Citizen of Jamaica and PR of Canada since 2017. His mother moved to Canada in 1990. In 1997, the applicant met Mrs. Clarke (second wife) who already had 2 children of her own. They moved in together in 1999 and had a son together.
First marriage: In 2005, PA’s mother told him about a woman in Canada (wife #1) is willing to marry him and sponsor him for PR and he landed in 2007 as PR with his son. He divorced her in 2008 and married his (2nd wife) in 2009.
Sponsorship application: he applied to sponsor Ms. Clarke in 2010 which resulted in investigation by IRCC. This resulted in him losing his PR. He continued to live in Canada without status with his son (has PR). He then received PR again in 2017 when he filed under H&C grounds. Then he applied to sponsor Ms. Clarke for the second time.
Reason for refusal: Marriage not genuine. Refused based on “New relationship” 4.1 of IRPR (4.1 For the purposes of these Regulations, a foreign national shall not be considered a spouse, a common-law partner or a conjugal partner of a person if the foreign national has begun a new conjugal relationship with that person after a previous marriage, common-law partnership or conjugal partnership with that person was dissolved primarily so that the foreign national, another foreign national or the sponsor could acquire any status or privilege under the Act.)
At the hearing: the Applicant admitted that his marriage to his First Wife was not genuine. He claimed responsibility for this and apologised. He also stated that he paid for his mistakes with the loss of his permanent resident status and subsequent finding of inadmissibility resulting in him being unable to travel to Jamaica to see Mrs. Clarke for about seven years. Previously, and after regaining his status in 2017, the Applicant regularly travelled to Jamaica to see Mrs. Clarke.
Decision by IAD/minister (JD review dismissed):
* Applicant’s relationship dissolved with Ms. Clarke in 2007, when he married the first wife.
* [18] The IAD agreed with the Minister, finding that the couple:
Had an ongoing obligation to answer all questions to Canadian immigration truthfully and, until the [Applicant’s] admission at the hearing, this had not been done. Had he previously disclosed his ongoing relationship with [Mrs. Clarke], and lack of dissolution of their relationship, despite his marriage to [his First Wife], [he] may have been further examined by Canadian immigration. As a result of [his] misrepresentation about both his ongoing relationship with [her] and his marriage to [his First Wife], legitimate lines of investigation were cut off to Canadian immigration.
* [19] The IAD further found that:
The purpose of section 4.1 of the Regulations is to prevent foreign nationals from doing exactly what the [Applicant] and [Mrs. Clarke] did: a foreign national cannot ‘formally’ dissolve a common-law partnership, but informally maintain that relationship, so that they are able to enter a marriage of convenience to obtain PR status in Canada, and then turn around and formalize the ongoing relationship as if it is a new relationship. Accepting the [Applicant’s] Counsel’s interpretation of section 4.1 of the Regulations would defeat the purpose of the legislation.
Key takeaways:
* Be honest in your application
* If you have made a mistake such as misrepresentation, it is important to consult with a legal professional and understand how to present your mistake to IRCC
If you’re thinking about immigrating to Canada through Investment, Business, Work, Sponsorship, or Studies, you’re at the right place! Get a FREE assessment with us! Click here.
