CANADAVISA.com Immigration Forum
May 29, 2012, 08:42:50 am
   Home   Assessment Help Search Login Register RSS  
*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

 News
 
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Regulations Changed September 30, 2010  (Read 5098 times)
rjessome
VIP Member
*******

Posts: 4080
Ratings: +180

« on: October 01, 2010, 11:59:19 am »

Further to the discussion started in this previous thread, http://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/changes-to-immigration-regs-affecting-spousalclcp-applications-expected-soon-t53171.0.html;msg429300#msg429300

the Regulations have now been changed and are the law.

See Operational Bulletin 238

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/bulletins/2010/ob238.asp

Specifically:

Amended provision
The amended R4 provision provides for each of the two “bad faith” tests to stand on its own and separates the requirement related to spouses, common-law partners and conjugal partners (R4(1)) from that related to adopted children (R4(2)). The amended R4 provision reads as follows:

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 marriage, common-law partnership or conjugal partnership

(a) was entered into primarily for the purpose of acquiring any status or privilege under the Act; or
(b) is not genuine.


AND

Implications
Assessing the bona fides of spousal, common-law or conjugal relationships

These changes will enable CIC and CBSA to deal more effectively with marriages of convenience, an ongoing issue of concern. They will allow officers to determine that a spousal, common-law or conjugal relationship is not bona fide if it is either not genuine or was entered into primarily for the purpose of acquiring a status or privilege under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Henceforth, only one of the two criteria will need to be present to determine that a relationship is not bona fide.

Logged
HoneyBird
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 808
Ratings: +65
Category........: FAM
Visa Office......: POS
App. Filed.......: Jun 2010
Doc's Request.: Jun 2010
AOR Received.: Sep 2010
File Transfer...: Aug 2010
Med's Done....: Jun 2010
Interview........: Waived
Passport Req..: Dec 2010
VISA ISSUED...: Jan 2011
LANDED..........: Feb 2011

« Reply #1 on: October 01, 2010, 12:30:15 pm »

Wait! this is affecting people in process!

Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) and Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) officers must commence applying the new provision on the day on which it entered into force. Therefore, effective today, CIC and CBSA officers must apply the new provision to all new applications, all applications in process for which a final decision has not yet been rendered and all new and pending appeals before the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD).
Logged
medellinguy
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 401
Ratings: +4
Category........: FAM
Visa Office......: Bogota
App. Filed.......: 29-10-2010
Doc's Request.: Everything in order I guess
AOR Received.: 07-04-2011
File Transfer...: 03-12-2010
Med's Done....: 15-09-2010
Passport Req..: 07-07-2011
VISA ISSUED...: 01-08-2011
LANDED..........: 07-09-2011

« Reply #2 on: October 01, 2010, 01:38:00 pm »

in vulgar terms, what does that change? English isn't my first language and I am not quite sure to understand... thank you
Logged
bonbon9
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 631
Ratings: +34
Category........: FAM
Visa Office......: MX
App. Filed.......: 09/15/2010
AOR Received.: 12/02/2010
File Transfer...: 10/14/2010
Interview........: WAIVED
Passport Req..: 02/23/2011
LANDED..........: 05/17/2011

« Reply #3 on: October 01, 2010, 01:47:35 pm »

Basically, if one of these is true your application will be denied:

(a) was entered into primarily for the purpose of acquiring any status or privilege under the Act; or
(b) is not genuine.

Scenarios:

1) Your relationship is not genuine, and it is only for the purpose of acquiring Pr in Canada (aka MARRIAGE OF CONVENIENCE). Your application will be denied.
2) Your relationship is genuine, but you decided to start a conjugal, common-law relationship or get married in order to immigrate to Canada. Your application will be denied.

The new law is basically including scenario 2 and denying PR to all those couples who decided to get married or start living together, sharing responsabilities etc, just to gather proof in order to get PR.
Logged

<3 bonbon
medellinguy
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 401
Ratings: +4
Category........: FAM
Visa Office......: Bogota
App. Filed.......: 29-10-2010
Doc's Request.: Everything in order I guess
AOR Received.: 07-04-2011
File Transfer...: 03-12-2010
Med's Done....: 15-09-2010
Passport Req..: 07-07-2011
VISA ISSUED...: 01-08-2011
LANDED..........: 07-09-2011

« Reply #4 on: October 01, 2010, 01:49:13 pm »

so, if I married my wife on September 3rd and ask for a PR so we can be together, they will think we are using wedding to live in Canada so they will refuse it?
Logged
bonbon9
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 631
Ratings: +34
Category........: FAM
Visa Office......: MX
App. Filed.......: 09/15/2010
AOR Received.: 12/02/2010
File Transfer...: 10/14/2010
Interview........: WAIVED
Passport Req..: 02/23/2011
LANDED..........: 05/17/2011

« Reply #5 on: October 01, 2010, 01:56:36 pm »

so, if I married my wife on September 3rd and ask for a PR so we can be together, they will think we are using wedding to live in Canada so they will refuse it?

No, not at all. There are cases that have been refused for taking too long to apply for PR. CIC would think they're not that eager to be together, and conclude it is not a genuine relationship.

You just have to provide proof that your decision to get married was based on love, and not a mean to gain PR.
Logged

<3 bonbon
matthewc
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 592
Ratings: +46
Category........: FAM
Visa Office......: Inland (CPC-Vegreville)
App. Filed.......: 27.09.2006
AOR Received.: 05.12.2006
VISA ISSUED...: 11.02.2008
LANDED..........: 31.03.2008

« Reply #6 on: October 01, 2010, 02:51:28 pm »

It will be interesting to see how this plays out on the ground, both in terms of CIC's assessment of relationships, and the inevitable appeals.

The real question is how will CIC officers differentiate between people who are in a genuine relationship, and get married and shortly thereafter apply for PR from those who are in a genuine relationship and got married just so the FN spouse can stay in Canada, or come to Canada.

It's totally unrealistic to think that two people who love each other might not decide to get married in order to be able to live together, if that's what is required by immigration. If CIC starts refusing people in genuine relationships on the grounds that they "only got married for immigration" I think there will be a s**t-storm.
Logged

jacquevw
Star Member
****

Posts: 123
Ratings: +1

« Reply #7 on: October 01, 2010, 03:01:30 pm »

Ok so now they have all of us worried! I submitted my application on 10 Sept!

Would it make my case any easier considering that I have a 1 year old daughter and another baby on the way with my Canadian wife?We have been married for a year now!
I dont want my application to be denied just because an officer is having a bad day and the fact that the laws have suddenly changed!

Good luck to all!!
Logged
matthewc
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 592
Ratings: +46
Category........: FAM
Visa Office......: Inland (CPC-Vegreville)
App. Filed.......: 27.09.2006
AOR Received.: 05.12.2006
VISA ISSUED...: 11.02.2008
LANDED..........: 31.03.2008

« Reply #8 on: October 01, 2010, 03:28:32 pm »

I wouldn't worry too much. It's unlikely someone in a genuine marriage with children who has been married for a year will be refused. What will be interesting is to see if people who marry then immediately apply for PR get refused, especially if they (perhaps) have just been refused entry into Canada as a visitor. I can imagine situations where under the new regs an IO might decide the marriage is for immigration purposes, even though the relationship is totally genuine.

It's too early to say really. We'll just have to see what happens. Hopefully once they update the processing manuals there will be more clarity in terms of how they plan to actually implement this change.

It is a concern that power-tripping IO's out there will use this to refuse apps they really shouldn't refuse. That happens.
Logged

canadianwoman
Champion Member
******

Posts: 2854
Ratings: +89
Category........: FAM
Visa Office......: Accra, Ghana
App. Filed.......: 30-01-2008
Interview........: 05-05-2009

« Reply #9 on: October 01, 2010, 03:34:02 pm »

Ok so now they have all of us worried! I submitted my application on 10 Sept!

Would it make my case any easier considering that I have a 1 year old daughter and another baby on the way with my Canadian wife?We have been married for a year now!
I dont want my application to be denied just because an officer is having a bad day and the fact that the laws have suddenly changed!

Good luck to all!!
Don't worry. With two kids and a year-long marriage, the visa officer should let you in.
Keep in mind that it used to be that an application could be refused for either reason. Then some cases on appeal were won when it was pointed out that the French and English versions differed - the French only had to prove one thing, the English two. So CIC changed the English version, and for a few years we only had to prove that the relationship was genuine, or that it wasn't entered into to get into Canada. Now they've changed it back to the way it used to be, and so now we have to prove both.
Logged
CharlieD10
VIP Member
*******

Posts: 4657
Ratings: +130
Category........: FAM
Visa Office......: KGN
App. Filed.......: 15-02-2011
File Transfer...: 09-05-2011
Med's Done....: 17-01-2011, 08-03-2012
Interview........: Waived
Passport Req..: 30-3-2012
VISA ISSUED...: 13-04-2012
LANDED..........: ?

« Reply #10 on: October 01, 2010, 03:38:43 pm »

IWhat will be interesting is to see if people who marry then immediately apply for PR get refused, especially if they (perhaps) have just been refused entry into Canada as a visitor. I can imagine situations where under the new regs an IO might decide the marriage is for immigration purposes, even though the relationship is totally genuine.

It's too early to say really. We'll just have to see what happens. Hopefully once they update the processing manuals there will be more clarity in terms of how they plan to actually implement this change.

It is a concern that power-tripping IO's out there will use this to refuse apps they really shouldn't refuse. That happens.

And there you state the crux of our dilemma.  We got married, applied for a TRV, I was denied.  We are now gathering our documents to apply for PR.  These new regulations terrify the daylights out of me, because all I can see is some IO deciding I married my husband to migrate.
Logged

http://tinyurl.com/Kingston-Jamaica

Spreadsheet for KG applications status since 2008.
matthewc
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 592
Ratings: +46
Category........: FAM
Visa Office......: Inland (CPC-Vegreville)
App. Filed.......: 27.09.2006
AOR Received.: 05.12.2006
VISA ISSUED...: 11.02.2008
LANDED..........: 31.03.2008

« Reply #11 on: October 01, 2010, 04:01:58 pm »

I'm certain the intent of this change isn't to find a way to refuse legitimate spouses. That would be contrary to one of the stated aims of the IRPA - family reunification.

I really wouldn't worry CharlieD10 - the fact that you married then applied for a TRV actually (to my mind) shows that gaining permanent status wasn't your main intention when you got married.
Logged

annabruce
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 268
Ratings: +17
Category........: FAM
Visa Office......: Vegreville
App. Filed.......: Received: 01-11-2010
Med's Done....: 30-11-2011, x-ray delayed (pregnancy)

« Reply #12 on: October 01, 2010, 04:08:46 pm »

I think some of you need to reread what is written

(a) was entered into primarily for the purpose of acquiring any status or privilege under the Act; or

A key word here is the word primarily

Therefore, there is nothing wrong with getting married because you want to accelerate acquiring any status or privilege under the Act, so long as that wasn't your primary purpose.  You need to prove that love was your primary motivation.

An IO could argue that my wife is coming to Canada primarily because she wants to make it easier to attend her musical studies in Montreal.  I need to show that her plan to study in Canada was only a consequence of her relationship with me, otherwise Canada would never have occured to her.  I also have to be very careful to prove that my relationship with her began before she acquired her first temporary resident visa to Canada.
Logged

App Received:  11/1/2010
Processing Started: 12/15/2010
App Returned: 12/15/2010
Processing Started Again:2/22/2011
AIP: 9/19/2011
Work Permit: 9/19/2011
Kess
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 407
Ratings: +13
Category........: FAM
Visa Office......: Buffalo
App. Filed.......: 06-08-2010
AOR Received.: 09-30-2010
File Transfer...: 07-09-2010
Med's Done....: 25-05-2010
Interview........: WAIVED
Passport Req..: 11-08-2011
VISA ISSUED...: 26-08-2011
LANDED..........: 06-09-2011

« Reply #13 on: October 01, 2010, 04:26:55 pm »

I was not expecting this change to be in force so quickly. 

Really hoping this isn't going to change the overall acceptance rates and is only used to make the OBVIOUS marriages of convienence easier to stop from immigrating.
Logged

May 8, 2010: Married
May 25: Medical
Aug 6: Received at CPC-M
Sept 7: Sponsorship approved
Sept 22: In process in Buffalo
Sept 30: AOR
Oct 18: Addt'l docs received
Mar 24: Rehab requested, May 12 delv'd
Aug 11: PPR
Sep 6: Landed
Nov 1: PR Card
bonbon9
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 631
Ratings: +34
Category........: FAM
Visa Office......: MX
App. Filed.......: 09/15/2010
AOR Received.: 12/02/2010
File Transfer...: 10/14/2010
Interview........: WAIVED
Passport Req..: 02/23/2011
LANDED..........: 05/17/2011

« Reply #14 on: October 01, 2010, 04:29:31 pm »

I think some of you need to reread what is written

(a) was entered into primarily for the purpose of acquiring any status or privilege under the Act; or

A key word here is the word primarily

Therefore, there is nothing wrong with getting married because you want to accelerate acquiring any status or privilege under the Act, so long as that wasn't your primary purpose.  You need to prove that love was your primary motivation.


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 marriage, common-law partnership or conjugal partnership

(a) was entered into primarily for the purpose of acquiring any status or privilege under the Act; or
(b) is not genuine.

"Primarly" refers to the initial reason to when the marriage, common-law partnership or conjugal partnership started, not the relationship itself. Which actually means that it is entirely wrong to decide that you want to become "serious" with your boyfriend/girlfriend, just to make them eligible to PR. CIC doesn't want people to take immigration as a reason to get married or start a serious relationship.
Logged

<3 bonbon
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC