Common-law and married to the same person
- Thread starter balwinder_kaur
- Start date
Yes, but what advantage? (There are some potential cases but quite uncommon)
Sure. If you qualify under common law, that's a good reason.
You'll want to document the common law carefully given previous refusal.
If you can help with documents, we have been together for 1.5 years and have the same address proofs on 3 documents.
See the details on the IRCC website. It should be easy for you in you have been living together for three years and can show multiple pieces of evidence dating back at least one year with the shared address.
I do not, specifically. There have been a few others here. It's not even controversial, i.e. it's clearly permitted.
To be honest, if the refusal has just happened, I think there is a possibility that they would reconsider if you requested to be considered as common law. (Although not sure it would be faster).
There is an operational manual of IRCC that mentions eg. that those who have applied as common law and submit evidence of marriage must be considered as married - and sure that you could request (and get legal support if you are willing to pay) it be treated as common law.
But I'm not implying this would be superior to just re-applying as common law. I just don't know. It may also depend upon other factors I don't know about (you've provided no info on things liek citizenship status, PR acquisition timing vs marriage/common law, etc).
Read the checklist for spousal/common-law sponsorship, it will outline expected levels of documentation.
Note, in above: you mention together but aren't specific about when residing together, when married, and when sponsor became a PR (or is citizen).
So if the PA is an Indian citizens( but living outside India)..does she need to the ritual ceremony to be recognize?
If it's been any significant length of time since the (unrecognized) marriage and they have the history of residing together to meet common law, I think that's the more reliable route. IMO.