Honeymoon is over for this BC couple

[rjessome]

http://www.theprovince.com/life/Honeymoon+over+woman+sues+Fijian+hubby+after+marriage+collapses/5174537/story.html


Honeymoon's over: B.C. woman sues Fijian hubby after marriage collapses
  By Keith Fraser, Postmedia News July 28, 2011   VANCOUVER — A B.C. woman who went to Fiji to find a husband is now suing him for damages after the marriage collapsed.

In September 2006, Sareena Prasad was introduced by her parents to Arvin Dutt Sharma as someone who might be a suitable husband.
She travelled to Fiji to meet Sharma in March 2007 and came away believing that he loved her, wished to marry her and have a family and intended to stay married, according to a civil claim filed in B.C. Supreme Court. The couple were married in Fiji, with Prasad paying for the wedding and the honeymoon.

Attempts by Prasad to sponsor Sharma to come to Canada were initially refused by immigration authorities, who did not accept that the marriage was genuine. Prasad, who has Canadian citizenship and is employed as a shipping associate, hired a lawyer to appeal the ruling and Sharma arrived in Canada in December 2009. But he but refused to attempt to find work and became physically and emotionally abusive towards Prasad, says the suit.  "The defendant Sharma lived with the plaintiff for approximately two weeks before he started disappearing for extended periods without notice or explanation to the plaintiff."

Sharma, it turned out, was living with relatives in Surrey after he'd falsely told her he had no kin in B.C., says the suit. In February 2010, after Prasad told Sharma that she was pregnant by him, he assaulted her and he subsequently coerced her to have an abortion against her wishes, claims the suit. Sharma was charged with assault and found guilty in Surrey Provincial Court in July 2010. He received a suspended sentence and one year of probation.

Prasad claims Sharma misrepresented his love for her and only married her to come to Canada. She says a Fijian woman named Renuka Devi, with whom Sharma had a relationship, had contributed to the deceit by convincing Prasad to marry him. Prasad says the conduct of Sharma and Devi was "cynical, manipulative, high-handed and malicious," and she is seeking general, special, punitive and aggravated damages.

No statement of defence has been filed. Sharma could not be reached. A notice of civil claim contains allegations that have not been proven in court.

[Love_Young]

I just love how in most of these cases Immigration gets it right by denying them based on non-genuine relationship. But love is blind and the sponsor tries it again only to find out the IO's were right in the first place. Obviously you can't judge them because as I said, love can be blind at times but if CIC is refusing you and your spouse, maybe you should at least consider taking a look back at it just to confirm it isn't before appealing it. Just a thought though...

[Kedeisha]

I just love how in most of these cases Immigration gets it right by denying them based on non-genuine relationship. But love is blind and the sponsor tries it again only to find out the IO's were right in the first place. Obviously you can't judge them because as I said, love can be blind at times but if CIC is refusing you and your spouse, maybe you should at least consider taking a look back at it just to confirm it isn't before appealing it. Just a thought though...

Agreed if outsiders can look n see its not real maybe just maybe u need to as well..by u i mean the person

[canadianwoman]

Here's the record of the appeal:
http://www.canlii.org/eliisa/highlight.do?text=sharma+prasad+marriage+immigration&language=en&searchTitle=Canada+%28federal%29+-+Immigration+and+Refugee+Board+of+Canada&path=/en/ca/irb/doc/2007/2007canlii52921/2007canlii52921.html

It seems the sponsor got a PR in Canada through a marriage of convenience herself! Some gall in complaining that somebody did the same thing to her.

[rjessome]

Well, at least she's not suing CIC.

[CharlieD10]

Here's the record of the appeal:
http://www.canlii.org/eliisa/highlight.do?text=sharma+prasad+marriage+immigration&language=en&searchTitle=Canada+%28federal%29+-+Immigration+and+Refugee+Board+of+Canada&path=/en/ca/irb/doc/2007/2007canlii52921/2007canlii52921.html

It seems the sponsor got a PR in Canada through a marriage of convenience herself! Some gall in complaining that somebody did the same thing to her.

Karma is a b*tch, isn't it?

[Aneyshar]

Karma is a b*tch, isn't it?

LOL, maybe Karma = Sharma? 

[CharlieD10]

Bahahaha nice one!

[Love_Young]

Well, at least she's not suing CIC.

Yeah, I was thinking the same.

LOL, maybe Karma = Sharma? 

Lol, good one. 

[CharlieD10]

Well, she can't sue CIC, can she?  All they have to do is hold up the case file with the "denied" stamp on it and say, "We TOLD you so" and she'd be laughed out of court.

Reading the appeal file on CanLII, even the appeals judge had doubts.  Yet, she said there was enough evidence to overcome those doubts, and overturned the denial. She also found the appellant and applicant credible and forthright witnesses, which just goes to show anyone can be fooled by a really good liar.  Or two.

[HoneyBird]

This is really so funny...if her marriage was indeed a marriage of convenience the second time around. So she is suing him...but is the government going to remove him? No mention there of whats happening.

BTW if the marriage is not real why were they still having sex? Why would he want to have sex with her and impregnate her? I would expect he would protection or demand she use protection.

[CharlieD10]

If there is any justice in the world of Immigration, somewhere there are 2 very busy CBSA officers banging out Section 44 reports for BOTH of them.

[HoneyBird]

Whats section 44 Reports?

[CharlieD10]

IRPA Division 5

Loss of Status and Removal


Report on Inadmissibility

Preparation of report

44. (1) An officer who is of the opinion that a permanent resident or a foreign national who is in Canada is inadmissible may prepare a report setting out the relevant facts, which report shall be transmitted to the Minister.

Section 44 authorizes an officer to prepare a report on inadmissibility.  In this case, they would be reportable under the following sections:

Misrepresentation

40. (1) A permanent resident or a foreign national is inadmissible for misrepresentation

(a) for directly or indirectly misrepresenting or withholding material facts relating to a relevant matter that induces or could induce an error in the administration of this Act;

(b) for being or having been sponsored by a person who is determined to be inadmissible for misrepresentation.

40(1)(a) for her, and both sections for him.