Travel document circumstances for person left as child

[manpreet4875]

Below information on Canadian website (https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/) under the heading of Circumstances beyond the person’s control, for applying Travel document for a person left Canada as a child with parent.. Based on this information I want to know / understand following

1. Is best time to apply travel document on reaching 18 years or 22 years of age?

• (Are they now over 22 years of age and returning at the earliest opportunity since becoming 22 years of age?)

2. Is still there a good opportunity for children removed as minor from Canada with parent ?

Circumstances beyond the person’s control

• Are the circumstances that led to the person remaining outside of Canada compelling and/or beyond their control?
• Was the person prevented from returning to Canada?
  • Why?
  • By whom or by what event?
• Did the person leave Canada as a child accompanying a parent?
• If they left as a child, are they now returning to Canada at the earliest possible opportunity?
• Are they now over 22 years of age and returning at the earliest opportunity since becoming 22 years of age?
• Does the person who is over 22 years of age meet the requirements to be considered a dependent child due to mental or physical condition and are or were they accompanying their parent when they left Canada?

Report a problem or mistake on this page

Date modified: 2020-02-05

 

[scylla]

Below information on Canadian website (https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/) under the heading of Circumstances beyond the person’s control, for applying Travel document for a person left Canada as a child with parent.. Based on this information I want to know / understand following

1. Is best time to apply travel document on reaching 18 years or 22 years of age?

• (Are they now over 22 years of age and returning at the earliest opportunity since becoming 22 years of age?)

2. Is still there a good opportunity for children removed as minor from Canada with parent ?

Circumstances beyond the person’s control

• Are the circumstances that led to the person remaining outside of Canada compelling and/or beyond their control?
• Was the person prevented from returning to Canada?
  • Why?
  • By whom or by what event?
• Did the person leave Canada as a child accompanying a parent?
• If they left as a child, are they now returning to Canada at the earliest possible opportunity?
• Are they now over 22 years of age and returning at the earliest opportunity since becoming 22 years of age?
• Does the person who is over 22 years of age meet the requirements to be considered a dependent child due to mental or physical condition and are or were they accompanying their parent when they left Canada?

Report a problem or mistake on this page

Date modified: 2020-02-05

They should apply as soon as possible after turning 18 to have a higher chance of success. If the family never established themselves in Canada (i.e. became PRs and then left Canada soon afterwards without really living in Canada for a period of time), this can reduce the chances of approval significantly.

 

[manpreet4875]

They should apply as soon as possible after turning 18 to have a higher chance of success. If the family never established themselves in Canada (i.e. became PRs and then left Canada soon afterwards without really living in Canada for a period of time), this can reduce the chances of approval significantly.

Dear Scylla, Thank you for reply.. In my case my child went with me once for 3 weeks , but afterward I went alone 2 times to Canada & lived about 3 months & done job there also. So my child wants to relocate Canada just on reaching 18 next year. She is single parent child & in India it is a social stigma & social questioning for her at every step. People less ask about herself & more about her parents reason for separation & bla bla. So hardship for her life here... Thats why she wants to relocate...She fight with me that why I did not stay there in Canada to live a life without these social issues...Pls suggest the best way..

 

[manpreet4875]

Unless they are dependent on their parents because of mental or physical conditions they should apply as soon as possible after turning 18, ie. reaching the age of majority.
The rules make it quite clear that a person over 22 must also "meet the requirements to be considered a dependent child due to mental or physical condition and are or were they accompanying their parent when they left Canada?"

Thank you FSW - So it means better to apply on reaching at 18years..

 

[scylla]

Dear Scylla, Thank you for reply.. In my case my child went with me once for 3 weeks , but afterward I went alone 2 times to Canada & lived about 3 months & done job there also. So my child wants to relocate Canada just on reaching 18 next year. She is single parent child & in India it is a social stigma & social questioning for her at every step. People less ask about herself & more about her parents reason for separation & bla bla. So hardship for her life here... Thats why she wants to relocate...She fight with me that why I did not stay there in Canada to live a life without these social issues...Pls suggest the best way..

She should apply for the PRTD under H&C as soon as she turns 18 next year.

You never established yourselves in Canada after getting PR and left Canada soon afterwards. So very difficult to say how IRCC will look at her case.

All she can do is apply and hope for the best.

 

[manpreet4875]

She should apply for the PRTD under H&C as soon as she turns 18 next year.

You never established yourselves in Canada after getting PR and left Canada soon afterwards. So very difficult to say how IRCC will look at her case.

All she can do is apply and hope for the best.

Thank you Scylla, thank you for valuable response. Pls clear more queries 1. How a child can establish herself/himself ? Because she is purely dependent on the parents. 2. Should she give reference of her father(me) also that he went there 3 times & tried to establish. 3. Should she apply the PRTD through a lawyer or herself directly. 4. She is learning French also, Should she add evidence for the same also in prtd?

 

[scylla]

Thank you Scylla, thank you for valuable response. Pls clear more queries 1. How a child can establish herself/himself ? Because she is purely dependent on the parents. 2. Should she give reference of her father(me) also that he went there 3 times & tried to establish. 3. Should she apply the PRTD through a lawyer or herself directly. 4. She is learning French also, Should she add evidence for the same also in prtd?

1. I don't think there is any way to show establishment since your family was there for such a short period of time.
2. I don't think this will help. She should focus on the fact that she was a minor when she was removed.
3. It's your choice.
4. I don't think this really helps an H&C argument. (FYI - French isn't needed or used in most of Canada.)

 

[canuck78]

Dear Scylla, Thank you for reply.. In my case my child went with me once for 3 weeks , but afterward I went alone 2 times to Canada & lived about 3 months & done job there also. So my child wants to relocate Canada just on reaching 18 next year. She is single parent child & in India it is a social stigma & social questioning for her at every step. People less ask about herself & more about her parents reason for separation & bla bla. So hardship for her life here... Thats why she wants to relocate...She fight with me that why I did not stay there in Canada to live a life without these social issues...Pls suggest the best way..

If being a child of a single parent was such a social stigma that it made it difficult to live in your home country I assume you would have moved to Canada even if you struggled. Moving as an 18 year when you are much more independent from your parents would mean that there would be less of a social stigma at this point.

 

[manpreet4875]

If being a child of a single parent was such a social stigma that it made it difficult to live in your home country I assume you would have moved to Canada even if you struggled. Moving as an 18 year when you are much more independent from your parents would mean that there would be less of a social stigma at this point.

Dear Canuck thank you for your views. I respect your views. As the time passes many challenges come in front of you, which you dont know before. As my daughter is also growing up & she is facing all these things at every front of life whether relatives, friend & neighbors & school etc. People are more interested in your personal life here. She wants to be free from this aspect of life . I also want that she should escape from these kind of social questioning & live an independent life in a society where these factors (for which you are not responsible ) should not put impact on your mind.
You can also suggest if she can apply now for PRTD at 17 years (best interest of the child) or at the age of majority on reaching 18 next year.

 

[canuck78]

Dear Canuck thank you for your views. I respect your views. As the time passes many challenges come in front of you, which you dont know before. As my daughter is also growing up & she is facing all these things at every front of life whether relatives, friend & neighbors & school etc. People are more interested in your personal life here. She wants to be free from this aspect of life . I also want that she should escape from these kind of social questioning & live an independent life in a society where these factors (for which you are not responsible ) should not put impact on your mind.
You can also suggest if she can apply now for PRTD at 17 years (best interest of the child) or at the age of majority on reaching 18 next year.

She needs to be 18 to be able to travel back alone as an adult. No argument that she may want to create her own path and not hear others opinions. The issue is whether she should be able to claim that she was removed as a child and should be able to return. You both had very little establishment in Canada so she has not had much attachment to Canada. Canada has become tougher when it comes to PRTDs when removed as a minor because many were using it as a way to secure domestic tuition without the family having ever spent much time in Canada and often never paying Income taxes. If denied she is also free to apply for a study permit and move to Canada that way.

 

[manpreet4875]

She needs to be 18 to be able to travel back alone as an adult. No argument that she may want to create her own path and not hear others opinions. The issue is whether she should be able to claim that she was removed as a child and should be able to return. You both had very little establishment in Canada so she has not had much attachment to Canada. Canada has become tougher when it comes to PRTDs when removed as a minor because many were using it as a way to secure domestic tuition without the family having ever spent much time in Canada and often never paying Income taxes. If denied she is also free to apply for a study permit and move to Canada that way.

For student permit is he need to surrender her PR first? What process she need to follow for student permit..

 

[armoured]

For student permit is he need to surrender her PR first? What process she need to follow for student permit..

Yes, she would have to renounce pr status first.

Obviously makes more sense for her to attempt to get the pr status recognized first by applying for prtd. A refusal on that will have same effect as renouncing (révocation of or status), leaving aside the question of appeals.

 

[PMM]

Hi

She needs to be 18 to be able to travel back alone as an adult. No argument that she may want to create her own path and not hear others opinions. The issue is whether she should be able to claim that she was removed as a child and should be able to return. You both had very little establishment in Canada so she has not had much attachment to Canada. Canada has become tougher when it comes to PRTDs when removed as a minor because many were using it as a way to secure domestic tuition without the family having ever spent much time in Canada and often never paying Income taxes. If denied she is also free to apply for a study permit and move to Canada that way.

1. Here is the latest Federal Court ruling on an appeal where the applicant was removed as a child.
https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-c...020/index.do?q=Removed+from+Canada+as+a+child

 

[dpenabill]

There is little doubt that in recent years Canada has been increasingly tough in granting H&C relief for PRs removed-as-a-minor, and it appears an older decision by FC Justice Barnes is increasingly being cited in support of these decisions. How much so is NOT at all clear.

I highly doubt the reason is that stated by @canuck78 (would help to see some credible source for the assertion, though I have doubts there is any at all); that is, I do NOT believe "Canada has become tougher when it comes to PRTDs when removed as a minor because many were using it as a way to secure domestic tuition without the family having ever spent much time in Canada and often never paying Income taxes."

There is no mention of that reasoning, for example, in the Federal Court decision cited and linked by @PMM (see https://canlii.ca/t/jg6tj ).

Rather, as in that case and in the other more recent cases, the reasoning continues be an application of long-established criteria for evaluating H&C factors in PR RO breach cases, with a primary focus on extent of breach, reason for not returning to Canada sooner, the PR's ties to Canada, the extent to which the PR was established in Canada, and other standard H&C factors including, of course, the impact on affected minors.

Justice Gleeson's decision was mostly based on the general standard of review which will uphold the IAD, though that includes affirming the reasoning applied by the IAD in denying relief to the removed-as-a-minor PR.

But in terms of outcome, yes, it appears that Canada has become tougher. Why the outcome has changed is more difficult to unravel but among the likely suspects is that there are more cases involving little or no establishment in Canada. And, again, how much tougher is not at all clear.

Leading to this . . . In removed-as-a-minor cases, where a young PR is seeking H&C relief for a failure to comply with the PR Residency Obligation, it warrants some emphasis that IAD decisions, rather than Federal Court decisions, generally tell far more about how such cases are being handled. Decisions by these tribunals, both the FC and the IAD, do NOT have the weight of binding precedent in other cases. Which is very evident in the case cited and linked here by PMM, since one sister was allowed to keep PR status based on having been removed as a minor, while the other was denied H&C relief and lost PR status, notwithstanding the almost identical factors for both.

Just a couple recent examples amply illustrate how much more information about the deliberative process, the reasoning, is available in IAD decisions. Compare the Faisal decision, by FC Justice Gleeson and cited above by @PMM, for example, with the discussion and analysis in the following IAD decisions:

Shahid https://canlii.ca/t/jdd82 October 2020 IAD decision denying appeal​

Zahid https://canlii.ca/t/jdjql September 2020 IAD decision denying appeal​

IN CONTRAST see​

Faisal https://canlii.ca/t/j5l5t October 2019 GRANTING relief​

The latter, for Natalia Faisal, was a favourable IAD decision just seven months before the IAD denied the appeal by her sister, Latiesha Faisal, the subject of the FC decision this year. Natialia got H&C relief; Latiesha did not. Natalia was 22 at the time of her successful IAD appeal. Latiesha was just 18 when hers was denied.

Justice Gleeson had no problem with the inconsistency between the two. Mostly, though, it appears he was not about to give Latiesha relief on the facts of her case EVEN THOUGH on very similar facts her sister obtained a favourable outcome. (With no suggestion of any wrong doing by anyone here, just as a comparative reference, the fact that a jury let O.J. Simpson get away with murder is no basis to let a different murderer go.)

So far, what we can fairly glean from the decisions is
(1) the FC will likely uphold the IAD's decision unless there is a blatant deviation from general reasoning
(2) for a removed-as-a-minor PR with minimal establishment in Canada, there is a substantial risk of NO H&C relief; but this can depend on other factors, such as more recent time spent in Canada together with significant REAL ties in Canada

There is not enough information to significantly change the general view that odd of relief seem GOOD for a PR who was removed-as-a-minor and who had been substantially established in Canada and who seeks to return to Canada soon after 18. But it is worth watching for further developments.

 

[canuck78]

There is little doubt that in recent years Canada has been increasingly tough in granting H&C relief for PRs removed-as-a-minor, and it appears an older decision by FC Justice Barnes is increasingly being cited in support of these decisions. How much so is NOT at all clear.

I highly doubt the reason is that stated by @canuck78 (would help to see some credible source for the assertion, though I have doubts there is any at all); that is, I do NOT believe "Canada has become tougher when it comes to PRTDs when removed as a minor because many were using it as a way to secure domestic tuition without the family having ever spent much time in Canada and often never paying Income taxes."

There is no mention of that reasoning, for example, in the Federal Court decision cited and linked by @PMM (see https://canlii.ca/t/jg6tj ).

Rather, as in that case and in the other more recent cases, the reasoning continues be an application of long-established criteria for evaluating H&C factors in PR RO breach cases, with a primary focus on extent of breach, reason for not returning to Canada sooner, the PR's ties to Canada, the extent to which the PR was established in Canada, and other standard H&C factors including, of course, the impact on affected minors.

Justice Gleeson's decision was mostly based on the general standard of review which will uphold the IAD, though that includes affirming the reasoning applied by the IAD in denying relief to the removed-as-a-minor PR.

But in terms of outcome, yes, it appears that Canada has become tougher. Why the outcome has changed is more difficult to unravel but among the likely suspects is that there are more cases involving little or no establishment in Canada. And, again, how much tougher is not at all clear.

Leading to this . . . In removed-as-a-minor cases, where a young PR is seeking H&C relief for a failure to comply with the PR Residency Obligation, it warrants some emphasis that IAD decisions, rather than Federal Court decisions, generally tell far more about how such cases are being handled. Decisions by these tribunals, both the FC and the IAD, do NOT have the weight of binding precedent in other cases. Which is very evident in the case cited and linked here by PMM, since one sister was allowed to keep PR status based on having been removed as a minor, while the other was denied H&C relief and lost PR status, notwithstanding the almost identical factors for both.

Just a couple recent examples amply illustrate how much more information about the deliberative process, the reasoning, is available in IAD decisions. Compare the Faisal decision, by FC Justice Gleeson and cited above by @PMM, for example, with the discussion and analysis in the following IAD decisions:

Shahid https://canlii.ca/t/jdd82 October 2020 IAD decision denying appeal​

Zahid https://canlii.ca/t/jdjql September 2020 IAD decision denying appeal​

IN CONTRAST see​

Faisal https://canlii.ca/t/j5l5t October 2019 GRANTING relief​

The latter, for Natalia Faisal, was a favourable IAD decision just seven months before the IAD denied the appeal by her sister, Latiesha Faisal, the subject of the FC decision this year. Natialia got H&C relief; Latiesha did not. Natalia was 22 at the time of her successful IAD appeal. Latiesha was just 18 when hers was denied.

Justice Gleeson had no problem with the inconsistency between the two. Mostly, though, it appears he was not about to give Latiesha relief on the facts of her case EVEN THOUGH on very similar facts her sister obtained a favourable outcome. (With no suggestion of any wrong doing by anyone here, just as a comparative reference, the fact that a jury let O.J. Simpson get away with murder is no basis to let a different murderer go.)

So far, what we can fairly glean from the decisions is
(1) the FC will likely uphold the IAD's decision unless there is a blatant deviation from general reasoning
(2) for a removed-as-a-minor PR with minimal establishment in Canada, there is a substantial risk of NO H&C relief; but this can depend on other factors, such as more recent time spent in Canada together with significant REAL ties in Canada

There is not enough information to significantly change the general view that odd of relief seem GOOD for a PR who was removed-as-a-minor and who had been substantially established in Canada and who seeks to return to Canada soon after 18. But it is worth watching for further developments.

We have seen numerous examples on this forum, including people inquiring about future plans, that people have discovered that getting PR while a child is young and landing in Canada while having no plans for the family to move to Canada is a way to allow children to return around 18 often to study. This tactic is clearly being discussed in some communities or being suggested by some consultants. Being able to secure a PRTD if removed as a minor is not widespread knowledge but seems to have certainly become more well known. I assume that is why it is no longer easy for children under 25 to secure a PRTD. Just to be clear we are talking about families who never tried to permanently relocate to Canada.