What if a dependent doesn't land immediately?

[Rob_TO]

Yes. And it says you are still "cohabiting" even if you live apart. They use the same term in Condition 51. So its a legal difficultly if they want the same word to mean different things at different times.

You are using the wrong definition of "cohabit" in this case (yes there is more than 1 definition). Your definition here (from 5.36), is the one used AFTER one has already established common-law. Hence a couple could live apart for a year straight while sponsor is in Canada and applicant is in home country and application is being processed... and they would still qualify under common-law.

Obviously this definition would not be applicable when trying to QUALIFY for common-law in the first place. Here the cohabitation must be continuous, with only temporary breaks allowed (like 3 or 4 weeks max). This is definition from 5.35. If people could cohabit while living separately for a year, then there would be no need for a conjugal class of application at all, and people applying inland would never get rejected because they weren't living at the same address in Canada.

The condition 51 rules follow the QUALIFYING rules of cohabitation. It explains in the condition 51 rules: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/bulletins/2012/ob480.asp#appc
While cohabitation means living together continuously, from time to time, one or the other partner may have left the home for work or business travel, family obligations, and so on. The separation must be temporary and short.
See Section 5.35 of OP 2 for more information.

And Section 5.35 clearly is for the QUALIFYING rules of cohabitation, which means you certainly can not simply live apart for years at a time, and still hope to qualify or satisfy the conditions. Here any break that goes beyond "temporary and short", which most agree is 3-4 weeks, could break the rules.

Actually, if they really cared they would explain exactly how long people can be apart before the government no longers consideres them cohabitating. They HAVE explained that in other documents and thats what I posted.

Indeed, it's very confusing not specifying lengths of time allowed before a break exceeds "temporary and short". In fact there is NO definition given anywhere in CIC documents, saying what times are and aren't allowed. They just leave it generic and at discretion of person reviewing the case.