Determination of Common Law/Conjugal Relationship

[canuck50]

It seems my first post went astray so I'll try again.

My Thai partner wants to apply first for a TRV for travel and then in the future for family sponsorship . We want to be sure to answer all application questions accurately. I trying calling IRCC many times but they do not answer. We are trying to get a determination of our status as common law as follows:

We have lived together over a five + year period, with annual breaks for me to travel to Canada for five months to satisfy provincial health insurance requirements. The first year I was able to stay for eleven months with special permission. During this period we have had three leases at different addresses in both our names and utility/bank statements for both of us mailed to our address. Most of the documents I read seem to indicate we meet the requirements for common law except one for family sponsorship that reads:

"has been living with you for at least 12 consecutive months, meaning you’ve been living together continuously for 1 year in a conjugal relationship, without any long periods apart

• Any time spent away from each other should have been
  • short
  • temporary"

Is it likely they would negate the five years of evidence because there is not one full period of 12 months, given that I am not allowed to stay that long without forfeiting my health insurance? I hope someone here can help me out based on their experience or knowledge of this situation, or point me in the right direction to get an official ruling. Thanks in advance.

 

[scylla]

It seems my first post went astray so I'll try again.

My Thai partner wants to apply first for a TRV for travel and then in the future for family sponsorship . We want to be sure to answer all application questions accurately. I trying calling IRCC many times but they do not answer. We are trying to get a determination of our status as common law as follows:

We have lived together over a five + year period, with annual breaks for me to travel to Canada for five months to satisfy provincial health insurance requirements. The first year I was able to stay for eleven months with special permission. During this period we have had three leases at different addresses in both our names and utility/bank statements for both of us mailed to our address. Most of the documents I read seem to indicate we meet the requirements for common law except one for family sponsorship that reads:

"has been living with you for at least 12 consecutive months, meaning you’ve been living together continuously for 1 year in a conjugal relationship, without any long periods apart

• Any time spent away from each other should have been
  • short
  • temporary"

Is it likely they would negate the five years of evidence because there is not one full period of 12 months, given that I am not allowed to stay that long without forfeiting my health insurance? I hope someone here can help me out based on their experience or knowledge of this situation, or point me in the right direction to get an official ruling. Thanks in advance.

It's a pretty black and white rule. You need to live together for one year (12 months) continuously to qualify as common law. Short & temporary absences are accepted. Based on the information provided on this forum, absences of three weeks or less are accepted (as long as they are very few). So if you lived together for five months continuously, then you are away for 2-3 weeks, then you come back and live together for another seven months continuously - you would be good.

On the other hands, if your absences have been five months, there's unfortunately zero chance that length of an absence will be accepted and that you can classify yourselves as common law.

The reason why you are unable to stay for 12 months straight is irrelevant.

 

[canuck50]

It's a pretty black and white rule. You need to live together for one year (12 months) continuously to qualify as common law. Short & temporary absences are accepted. Based on the information provided on this forum, absences of three weeks or less are accepted (as long as they are very few). So if you lived together for five months continuously, then you are away for 2-3 weeks, then you come back and live together for another seven months continuously - you would be good.

On the other hands, if your absences have been five months, there's unfortunately zero chance that length of an absence will be accepted and that you can classify yourselves as common law.

The reason why you are unable to stay for 12 months straight is irrelevant.

I see. Then what about the category of Conjugal partner which seems like it might apply. ie: a couple who live together for extended periods but not continuously due to extenuating circumstances?

 

[scylla]

I see. Then what about the category of Conjugal partner which seems like it might apply. ie: a couple who live together for extended periods but not continuously due to extenuating circumstances?

You won't qualify since there are no real immigration barriers stopping you from living together for a full year. The fact you want to retain your health care and therefore live in Canada for periods of time will not be regarded as a barrier. Conjugal is a non-starter.

Presumably there's also nothing stopping you from getting married.

 

[canuck_in_uk]

It seems my first post went astray so I'll try again.

My Thai partner wants to apply first for a TRV for travel and then in the future for family sponsorship . We want to be sure to answer all application questions accurately. I trying calling IRCC many times but they do not answer. We are trying to get a determination of our status as common law as follows:

We have lived together over a five + year period, with annual breaks for me to travel to Canada for five months to satisfy provincial health insurance requirements. The first year I was able to stay for eleven months with special permission. During this period we have had three leases at different addresses in both our names and utility/bank statements for both of us mailed to our address. Most of the documents I read seem to indicate we meet the requirements for common law except one for family sponsorship that reads:

"has been living with you for at least 12 consecutive months, meaning you’ve been living together continuously for 1 year in a conjugal relationship, without any long periods apart

• Any time spent away from each other should have been
  • short
  • temporary"

Is it likely they would negate the five years of evidence because there is not one full period of 12 months, given that I am not allowed to stay that long without forfeiting my health insurance? I hope someone here can help me out based on their experience or knowledge of this situation, or point me in the right direction to get an official ruling. Thanks in advance.

https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/determination-of-common-law-conjugal-relationship.681624/