What if a dependent doesn't land immediately?

[canvis2006]

Best to land before expiry of visa.......there is no guarantee s/he would be accepted and issued another visa in the future.
Better to land and not waste the chance provided.

 

[steerpike]

I think people are reading too much into condition 51. It doesn't say you must live in a common-law relationship. It says you must be in a conjugal relationship for 2 years. Theres no set time that a couple must live together. Honestly, i think they will only use condition 51 in cases of divorce/seprartion, or when the couple is living independently for a very long time (years).

 

[teamduckie]

Hey, so I did some digging and found this http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?q=727&t=4

According to that, I just need to live with my spouse for 2 out of 5 years, so it would be great if we could process the landing if we get accepted, then have her live in the US to continue making money while I stay in Canada, then maybe after a year make the final move to Canada.

Is this correct? And will I run into trouble with expiring medicals and how should we go about that if we do?

Thanks all

 

[Rob_TO]

Read here: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/publications/family-sponsorship.asp You must live together with your sponsor in a legitimate relationship for two years from the day you receive conditional permanent residence.
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/bulletins/2012/ob480.asp The condition requires the sponsored spouse or partner to cohabit in a conjugal relationship with their sponsor for a period of two years after the day on which they became a permanent resident.

A CIC officer can request evidence of compliance if they have reason to believe that the spouse or partner is not complying or has not complied with the condition. These cases will be investigated as any other possible marriage of convenience. See instructions in OB 366 – Processing tips and investigating possible marriages of convenience (MOC). Furthermore, evidence of compliance can be requested as part of a random assessment of the overall level of compliance with the condition by the permanent residents who are or were subject to it


PR and sponsor must cohabit, for 2 years as of the date the applicant landed as PR. Cohabit means to live together in the same home for 2 consecutive years. Similar to common-law rules, short/temporary breaks would be allowed for school, work, family reasons etc. But to have PR live and maintain a home in the US while the sponsor does same in Canada, is clearly not complying with the conditional rules.

Will CIC actually enforce this rule if the couple has not actually broken up? Who knows... but I sure wouldn't want to be a test case. In many cases CBSA will easily be able to tell if a couple has been cohabiting or not each time a PR tries crossing the border, and I have no idea if they will be reporting this to CIC or not.
Also in many fraudulent marriages the sponsor/PR are not actually a couple, but are working together in the fraud (perhaps PR has paid the sponsor). For these cases nothing will be reported to CIC, but CIC would still be interested in investigating them. So they will be going after some cases that are not reported directly to them.

It doesn't say you must live in a common-law relationship.

Yes, it specifically does say this.

 

[steerpike]

Yes, it specifically does say this.

You posted it. It says conjugal. And it has to be conjugal (the loosest of the categories) because if it said marriage or commonlaw then conjugal applicants wouldnt be able to satisfy it. And while "living together" can help prove conjugal, it is not a hard and fast requirement the way it is for commonlaw.

 

[Rob_TO]

You posted it. It says conjugal. And it has to be conjugal (the loosest of the categories) because if it said marriage or commonlaw then conjugal applicants wouldnt be able to satisfy it. And while "living together" can help prove conjugal, it is not a hard and fast requirement the way it is for commonlaw.

You need to read the whole thing, not just 1 word: COHABIT in a conjugal relationship.
So you must be 1) married, common-law, or conjugal, AND 2) cohabit/living together. You can't just pick bits and pieces out of the rules as it suits you.

 

[Rob_TO]

Also here is the CIC link to the definition of "cohabit" for conditional PR purposes:

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/bulletins/2012/ob480.asp#appb
Cohabitation
- Means to “live together.” Two people who are cohabiting have combined their affairs and set up their household together in one dwelling.
- 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. Any periods of separation must be temporary and short.

 

[teamduckie]

Ok so going by this, if we were still using the application processing times to save money and were worried about being forced to land sooner than we would like, we should postpone our application?

 

[Rob_TO]

Ok so going by this, if we were still using the application processing times to save money and were worried about being forced to land sooner than we would like, we should postpone our application?

Is there really any reason to postpone moving to Canada after getting PR? Once PR is granted, she will have a full SIN so can work for any company in Canada.

But yes if she has no intention to move to Canada when the PR is actually granted and you are talking more than an additional year of her living in US while you live in Canada, then it might be good to hold off on submitting the application. From when you submit the app, you will basically have 1 year to prepare to officially "land" as PR. Even if PR is done quicker, expiry date on COPR will always be 1 year from medical exam date.

 

[agarand8]

Is there really any reason to postpone moving to Canada after getting PR? Once PR is granted, she will have a full SIN so can work for any company in Canada.

I agree with this. I don't understand why you would postpone the move. She can work in Canada no problem after PR so there's only a small transition period where she will be looking for a job. But she can avoid that by starting to look right when she gets PPR. When she moves to Canada and you are living together you would only have one set of household expenses between the two of you whereas being separated you presumably would each have your own expenses. It seems like it would make more sense to be living together ASAP.

 

[teamduckie]

Well we were going to get married end of this month April 30th, 2014 when she came up to visit me in Toronto, as well as do the medical before she heads back to the US. We would then have to wait 1-2 months I believe for a marriage certificate which is around when we would be sending in our complete application. Going by this information and all goes well and approved, does this mean she would have to land a year from the medical so ~April 30, 2015 because that's when the COPR expires? (Again, pretending that everything goes smoothly).

The reason for waiting would be to save up financially as well as completing education. We were wondering how we can set things up on our own schedule or are we strictly forced to move within the given time period of our medical exam or whenever PR is granted.

 

[steerpike]

You need to read the whole thing, not just 1 word: COHABIT in a conjugal relationship.
So you must be 1) married, common-law, or conjugal, AND 2) cohabit/living together. You can't just pick bits and pieces out of the rules as it suits you.

It's not as simple as that. For example:

"After the one year period of cohabitation has been established, the partners may live apart for periods of time without legally breaking the cohabitation. For example, a couple may have been separated due to armed conflict, illness of a family member, or for employment or education-related reasons, and therefore do not cohabit at present (see also 5.44 for information on persecution and penal control). Despite the break in cohabitation, a common-law relationship exists if the couple has cohabited continuously in a conjugal relationship in the past for at least one year and intend to do so again as soon as possible.'

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/op/op02-eng.pdf section 5.36

 

[on-hold]

I'd like to confuse this issue with another technicality that I've seen raised elsewhere which isn't often considered. I believe (only believe), that the technical granting of time towards the residency obligation when abroad is not for 'living with' a Canadian citizen spouse, but 'accompanying' a Canadian citizen spouse. In other words, technically, of the poster is a Canadian citizen and goes to live in his wife's home in the States, she is not accompanying him, and CIC could refuse this as satisfying her RO. Whereas if he gets a job in Italy and she joins him there, then because the PR is travelling with the citizen spouse for the spouse's purposes, the requirement will be meant.

I don't know if this is enforced in practice, but I think it could be technically applied to object to the couple setting up their life in the PR's home country.

 

[Rob_TO]

It's not as simple as that. For example:

"After the one year period of cohabitation has been established, the partners may live apart for periods of time without legally breaking the cohabitation. For example, a couple may have been separated due to armed conflict, illness of a family member, or for employment or education-related reasons, and therefore do not cohabit at present (see also 5.44 for information on persecution and penal control). Despite the break in cohabitation, a common-law relationship exists if the couple has cohabited continuously in a conjugal relationship in the past for at least one year and intend to do so again as soon as possible.'

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/op/op02-eng.pdf section 5.36

That is the definition for establishing the legal definition of common-law. After 1 year living together, you have established common-law and are still common-law even if you then need to live apart. Similar to how a married couple is still married even if they need to live apart.

But this is coming from the operation manuals to process PR application, and has absolutely nothing to do with condition 51 which applies after one gets PR.

For condition 51, the rules are explained very clearly that you must satisfy being in a married, common-law or conjugal relationship, AND that you MUST cohabit/live together for 2 years. There is no other interpretation of this rule, as it's explained on the CIC site. If they didn't care if you were continuously cohabiting during this 2 years time, then they wouldn't have put the words cohabiting/living together in EVERY single mention of the rule.

 

[steerpike]

That is the definition for establishing the legal definition of common-law. After 1 year living together, you have established common-law and are still common-law even if you then need to live apart. Similar to how a married couple is still married even if they need to live apart.

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.

For condition 51, the rules are explained very clearly that you must satisfy being in a married, common-law or conjugal relationship, AND that you MUST cohabit/live together for 2 years. There is no other interpretation of this rule, as it's explained on the CIC site. If they didn't care if you were continuously cohabiting during this 2 years time, then they wouldn't have put the words cohabiting/living together in EVERY single mention of the rule.

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.