POLICAP said:
I have a similar case. I migrated to Canada under independent
professional category in year 2000. I became a Canadian citizen in year 2003. I was in a relationship in since 1990 that resulted into 2 kids. But the I was not married to this lady and at the same time I was responsible to financing and taken care of these kids. After I became a Canadian I went back home to married this lady under the Civil law marriage. The ceremony took place both the traditional marriage and Civil law marriage was conducted.
In 2004 I filled outland application for PR and she was refused because the VO did not believed there was a genie marriage between us. I did not appeal. In 2005, I moved to the US to work. With my US work visa, I was able to bring her and her dependent children to US. Due to US economy we moved back to Canada. I was able to get Visitor visa for 3 years. In January, 2011, I applied for Inland PR . Will I be able to sponsor her and the dependent children? Will this be a missrepresentation
I'm shocked they didn't claim you had misrepresented your original application, since it sounds like you were in a common-law relationship back in 2000. Perhaps definitions have changed in the past 12 years. However, if they rejected you in 2004 AFTER you were married, they clearly can't then go back and argue you were in a common-law relationship prior to that.
Did you have your children examined as part of your application back in 2000? If not, I'd be fearful of you running into their exclusion from family sponsorship. Although again, if the VO decided your relationship wasn't "genuine" back in 2004/2005 and your children were on that application I cannot see how they can then go back and apply a terminal disclaimer logic to your original application.
Again, my mind boggles - how can a VO decide that a married couple WITH CHILDREN do not have a legitimate relationship? I could see the VO saying "these people should have been declared back in the original application but were not and are therefore barred from sponsorship" but not "this doesn't look like a legitimate relationship to me."
To be honest, this sounds like a potentially complicated case. You have many months to go before CIC is going to open your file and even look at it. It seems like you can wait and see what they say, but you may want to be prepared in case there are problems. If CIC has problems with your application, you are going to need a VERY good attorney. You might get lucky and the IO won't really look back beyond your previous application, in which case I think you've overcome the "not a genuine relationship" claim.
Of course, you didn't mention when your children were born, so perhaps my confusion is with the wording of your description (which made it sound as if they were born between 1990 and 2000) - if they were born AFTER you landed, then you wouldn't be barred from sponsoring them. If they were born BEFORE you landed and not declared on your application, under current law you would be barred from sponsoring them.
The downside to the approach you've taken is that in the outland sponsorship case, if they turn you down you have the right to an IAD appeal and THEY can consider humanitarian and compassionate issues. If they turn down your inland application, your only recourse will be to federal court, where they are not going to consider H&C.
I certainly hope others in the forum have more advise to give you (other than "start interviewing lawyers").
