"Five-year Sponsorship Bar"

[amorr76]

Hi all,

I got my PR in 2009 and sponsored my wife in 2010. I am still a PR but don't think i can meet the requirement to renew my PR. My question is can my wife sponsor me? Would the "Five-year Sponsorship Bar" apply here?

Many thanks.

 

[computergeek]

Hi all,

I got my PR in 2009 and sponsored my wife in 2010. I am still a PR but don't think i can meet the requirement to renew my PR. My question is can my wife sponsor me? Would the "Five-year Sponsorship Bar" apply here?

Many thanks.

A plain text reading of the new regulation would certainly suggest that she is not eligible to sponsor you until 2015 (when she has been a PR for 5 years).

You are less than 4 years into your permanent residency - is there some reason you cannot remain in Canada until you are in compliance with the residency obligation. You use the term "renew my PR" but in fact you never need to renew PR - only the PR card, and as long as you are inside Canada you don't need a valid PR card. Thus, the best thing to do might be to simply wait until you are back in compliance (e.g., 730 days in the preceding five years) and then apply for a new PR card.

Barring that, you could make an H&C argument.

My guess is that even if you are outside Canada right now, you could return and probably won't have any problems at the border (with more than a year to go on your current PR card). Then you just need to come back into compliance before you apply for a new PR card.

Good luck!

 

[Rob_TO]

Hi all,

I got my PR in 2009 and sponsored my wife in 2010. I am still a PR but don't think i can meet the requirement to renew my PR. My question is can my wife sponsor me? Would the "Five-year Sponsorship Bar" apply here?

Many thanks.

The rule for 5-year sponsorship ban for spouses didn't come into effect until March, 2012. As long as her application for PR was submitted before this (which it was in 2010), she is NOT subject to the 5-year ban so should be able to sponsor a spouse at any time.

See here for detailed info: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/bulletins/2012/ob386.asp

I'm not sure if there is any rule of a PR sponsoring the person that sponsored them to begin with...

 

[amorr76]

thank you both.

 

[computergeek]

The rule for 5-year sponsorship ban for spouses didn't come into effect until March, 2012. As long as her application for PR was submitted before this (which it was in 2010), she is NOT subject to the 5-year ban so should be able to sponsor a spouse at any time.

I think you are misinterpreting the new regulation:

The amendment, which came into force on March 2, 2012 upon registration, bars a previously-sponsored spouse or partner, from sponsoring a new spouse or partner within five years of becoming a PR even if the sponsor acquired citizenship during that period.

It applies to applications received on or after 2 March 2012. The landing date of the PR or Citizen is not material to the bar, as it is tied to the application date of the new sponsorship.

Note specifically the table that follows this text in the OB that says "Sponsorship application received on or following the day the regulatory amendment came into force" and then in the next box "Subject to the 5-year sponsorship bar"

 

[Rob_TO]

It applies to applications received on or after 2 March 2012. The landing date of the PR or Citizen is not material to the bar, as it is tied to the application date of the new sponsorship.

Note specifically the table that follows this text in the OB that says "Sponsorship application received on or following the day the regulatory amendment came into force" and then in the next box "Subject to the 5-year sponsorship bar"

The confusion is the title of table is "Scenarios for previously sponsored spouses/partners", so was assuming "sponsorship application" had to do with when the existing PR did their application (to grandfather it), and not new application for new spouse.
Anyways thanks for clearing up!

 

[computergeek]

The OP has in fact clearly demonstrated at least one case where the regulation is deficient.

The other option would be to apply for H&C purposes. I suspect it would be easy to win such a case, but that's a 2-3 YEAR application wait. That's why I thought trying to obtain H&C relief for the residency obligation failure would be easier. Then when I realized the timelines of the OP it occurred to me that he's not going to have any problems as long as he can get into Canada and stay here.

As Leon just pointed out in a different thread, BSOs very seldom go through the trouble of issuing A44 reports at the POE. His theory was because they assumed the PR would make the mistake of applying for a PR card at which point it will trigger a residency obligation examination.

 

[amorr76]

after reading the OP more carefully, i am thinking this rule should apply only to the case when a sponsored spouse wants to sponsor a NEW spouse. it should't apply to the original spouse. it seems it's trying to prevent a scam that a sponsored spouse files for divorce and then sponsors a new spouse. any thoughts?

 

[computergeek]

after reading the OP more carefully, i am thinking this rule should apply only to the case when a sponsored spouse wants to sponsor a NEW spouse. it should't apply to the original spouse. it seems it's trying to prevent a scam that a sponsored spouse files for divorce and then sponsors a new spouse. any thoughts?

That is certainly the intent, but when I read the regulations, I don't see anything that would support that exception.

 

[Rob_TO]

That is certainly the intent, but when I read the regulations, I don't see anything that would support that exception.

Well the official rule does state: bars a previously-sponsored spouse or partner, from sponsoring a new spouse or partner within five years of becoming a PR.

It's a new application, but it is not a new spouse. Could be interpreted either way. CIC should have used the words "any spouse" instead of "new spouse" if they didn't want to make any exceptions.

 

[computergeek]

Well the official rule does state: bars a previously-sponsored spouse or partner, from sponsoring a new spouse or partner within five years of becoming a PR.

It's a new application, but it is not a new spouse. Could be interpreted either way. CIC should have used the words "any spouse" instead of "new spouse" if they didn't want to make any exceptions.

It's enough wiggle room that one might be able to convince the VO to allow it. If they disallowed it, I'd probably go to Federal Court (it's a matter of law, and FCC is much faster for this type of issue than IAD would be.)