Spousal PR of a Canadian citizen

[sheikhzaid]

I have few question if some knowledgeable folks can help me get an answer, I will highly appreciate.

I am a recent PR of a Canadian citizen. I have two questions in particular:

1) is it a must for me to land in Canada to activate the PR?

2) I read somewhere here that once the PR is granted to a spouse of citizen, they need not to oblige by the 3 years out of 5 for the renewal of PR and PR stays in an active status as long as I am married to the Canadian citizen. Is this true? If not, do I need to apply for a PR again if I fail to meet the 3 year requirement for a renewal even though I stay married to the Canadian citizen?

 

[Ponga]

I have few question if some knowledgeable folks can help me get an answer, I will highly appreciate.

I am a recent PR of a Canadian citizen. I have two questions in particular:

1) is it a must for me to land in Canada to activate the PR?

2) I read somewhere here that once the PR is granted to a spouse of citizen, they need not to oblige by the 3 years out of 5 for the renewal of PR and PR stays in an active status as long as I am married to the Canadian citizen. Is this true? If not, do I need to apply for a PR again if I fail to meet the 3 year requirement for a renewal even though I stay married to the Canadian citizen?

1. You can land virtually if you are already in Canada, but you must `land' to become a PR

2. You must meet the Residency Obligation (R.O.) to maintain your PR status, which is at least 730 days within each rolling 5 year period. Your PR Card expires (usually after 5 years), but your status does not. You must maintain your R.O. to be eligible to renew your card. Your status can be revoked if you fail to meet the R.O.

Being married to a Canadian citizen does NOT relieve you of the R.O.; it applies to all PRs.

 

[ERCAN]

Just with a small addition to Ponga`s comment. Your time abroad WITH Canadian citizen spouse counts towards R.O. But you`ll have to prove that you lived together abroad and there is no defined 100% hard proof for that. It`s risky.
https://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?qnum=1466&top=10
You travel with a spouse or common-law partner
Your spouse or common-law partner needs to be:

• a Canadian citizen, or
• a permanent resident working outside Canada, full-time for:
  • a Canadian business, or
  • the Canadian federal, provincial or territorial government

 

[sheikhzaid]

1. You can land virtually if you are already in Canada, but you must `land' to become a PR

2. You must meet the Residency Obligation (R.O.) to maintain your PR status, which is at least 730 days within each rolling 5 year period. Your PR Card expires (usually after 5 years), but your status does not. You must maintain your R.O. to be eligible to renew your card. Your status can be revoked if you fail to meet the R.O.

Being married to a Canadian citizen does NOT relieve you of the R.O.; it applies to all PRs.

I read that if I am with the canadian citizen spouse even outside canada, it is counted towards RO. Is it counted as one day or half a day?

 

[Buletruck]

It will depend on who accompanied whom in many cases. A PR accompanying a Canadian citizen for work would likely fall under the rule. A Canadian citizen following a sponsored PR probably would not. Particularly if you have no intent to settle in Canada and have no established ties. The intent of a PR is just what it says, permanent residence. It's not meant to be a convienient travel visa.

 

[Ponga]

I read that if I am with the canadian citizen spouse even outside canada, it is counted towards RO. Is it counted as one day or half a day?

It MAY count as a full day, but it may NOT if IRCC isn't convinced that the PR followed their Canadian citizen spouse. It also matters if the PR never lived in Canada with the Canadian spouse.

 

[ERCAN]

It will depend on who accompanied whom in many cases. A PR accompanying a Canadian citizen for work would likely fall under the rule. A Canadian citizen following a sponsored PR probably would not. Particularly if you have no intent to settle in Canada and have no established ties. The intent of a PR is just what it says, permanent residence. It's not meant to be a convienient travel visa.

It seems that there is no such provision as to determine who accompanied whom. At least I failed to find it.
https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/ircc/migration/ircc/english/resources/manuals/op/op10-eng.pdf (OP 10 Permanent Residency Status Determination)
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/sor-2002-227/section-61.html
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/i-2.5/section-28.html

The intent part of residing abroad was removed from the assessment.. The OP 10 explicitly states that "These provisions are substantially different from those contained in the former Immigration Act, where retaining residency was largely dependent on a satisfactory demonstration of a person’s “intent” not to abandon Canada as their place of permanent residence. "

But I would agree that this course of action is not recommended and will be quite risky.
"The burden of proof rests with the applicants to provide the necessary information and evidence to satisfy an officer that they are in compliance with the provisions of R61(4), (5) and (6). E" (OP10 p.31)
There is no specific set of documents that will satisfy an officer. So this should be reserved for exceptional circumstances and very well documented.

 

[scylla]

It seems that there is no such provision as to determine who accompanied whom. At least I failed to find it.
https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/ircc/migration/ircc/english/resources/manuals/op/op10-eng.pdf (OP 10 Permanent Residency Status Determination)
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/sor-2002-227/section-61.html
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/i-2.5/section-28.html

The intent part of residing abroad was removed from the assessment.. The OP 10 explicitly states that "These provisions are substantially different from those contained in the former Immigration Act, where retaining residency was largely dependent on a satisfactory demonstration of a person’s “intent” not to abandon Canada as their place of permanent residence. "

But I would agree that this course of action is not recommended and will be quite risky.
"The burden of proof rests with the applicants to provide the necessary information and evidence to satisfy an officer that they are in compliance with the provisions of R61(4), (5) and (6). E" (OP10 p.31)
There is no specific set of documents that will satisfy an officer. So this should be reserved for exceptional circumstances and very well documented.

Here's a good link with the information you're looking for (including links to federal court appeal cases).