PR Renew and Residency Assessment
- Thread starter SAM2000
- Start date
IRCC may or may NOT allow the application to be withdrawn. Policy and practice allows IRCC to go either way.
However, once a formal residency assessment is commenced it appears the odds are high that IRCC will proceed with that assessment notwithstanding the PR's request to withdraw the application. Not providing the requested information could lead IRCC to make a RO compliance determination based on what it has. Burden of proof is on the applicant and a failure to prove RO compliance could lead to being issued a Departure Order.
How to approach this depends a lot on your particular circumstances, not the least of which (of course) is how solidly in compliance you are, or how much in breach of the PR RO you are or could appear to be.
Probably does NOT relate to you but just in case: A huge factor is whether there might be a possibility IRCC could perceive there is a significant discrepancy between the information you provided (especially as to dates present versus dates absent from Canada) and what IRCC believes the facts to be. It is very difficult to forecast how much of a discrepancy, between these, will trigger concerns about potential misrepresentation. A few or small discrepancies are usually considered to be mistakes not misrepresentation. Even fairly big discrepancies can be handled as if due to a mistake not misrepresentation. But if IRCC perceives there was any deliberate misrepresentation, that is likely to trigger continuing and severe scrutiny, and it can trigger an independent ground to take action to terminate PR status. Thus, if there is much chance IRCC could perceive your account of absence/presence to be so inaccurate as to constitute potential misrepresentation, that could be serious. That could be time-to-lawyer-up.
Thanks Dpenabill, this was really informative and help
It can't understand the reason behind the significance IRCC puts on physical presence from Canada .. As if there is a believe that Canada is a country that is hard to live and survive in versus being a country of dreams and opportunities for immigrants from all over the world
It can't understand the reason behind the significance IRCC puts on physical presence from Canada .. As if there is a believe that Canada is a country that is hard to live and survive in versus being a country of dreams and opportunities for immigrants from all over the world
A valid question at this point might be "Were you, in fact, in compliance with the Residency Obligation requirements, when you submitted the application?". If not, you may be in for some "interesting times".
Agencies like IRCC have a mandate to apply and enforce the law. The current law requires a PR to be present (or be entitled to credit as if present) at least 730 days within the preceding five years. IRCC is compelled by law to enforce this. In the general yet practical sense, Canada is a nation governed by the RULE OF LAW, so of course actually applying and enforcing the law not only has much significance but is an important priority. Indeed, in short, that is what IRCC does, as in apply and enforce Canadian immigration law. Including the PR RO.
I could offer a partial, somewhat shallow explanation, together with some probable speculation as to the reasons and relevant policies, as to why Parliament enacted the PR Residency Obligation, largely reiterating what should be rather obvious. Recognizing that immigration policies are complicated, involving a wide range of complex and interrelated factors, objectives, priorities, and contingencies. Just matters related to WHO is granted PR status, for example, is itself a very complex subject involving, just on the surface let alone getting into the weeds, policies about attracting skilled workers, accommodating refugees, and facilitating family unification, with due consideration for the impact of immigration on communities, the workforce, as well as the availability and cost of essential and non-essential government services, locally, provincially, and nationally. It is COMPLICATED.
However, the primary reason for the PR RO, as articulated by the IAD and Federal Courts, is simply that the purpose of the grant of PR status is so that individual can PERMANENTLY settle and live in Canada; thus, PRs are expected to actually settle and live in Canada. There is, nonetheless, a liberal and generous allowance for time spent abroad so that PRs can attend to all sorts of various matters that might compel them to spend time abroad. Close family illness for example. As the IAD and the Federal Courts have oft emphasized, the PR RO is very generous. An individual can actually spend a lot more time abroad (up to three-fifths overall) than in Canada and still maintain PERMANENT RESIDENCE status in Canada.
For you, for any PR who has applied for a new PR card or who is abroad and applying for a PR Travel Document, or who is otherwise being examined by IRCC or CBSA (such as in a Secondary PoE examinations when entering Canada) as to compliance with the PR RO, the key, overriding question is that posed by @zardoz:
As @zardoz alludes, if you are not in compliance with the PR RO, dealing with this is what is important.
And, if my previous post did not make it clear, if you are NOT in compliance with the PR RO, the odds are that a request to withdraw the PRC application will NOT stop IRCC from proceeding with the residency determination.