Will IRCC consider this misrepresentation because my ex-wife and I previously shared an address before we got married? Both applied PR independently

[Unknown1996]

Timeline:

• I came to Canada in 2022.
• From April 2022 to August 2024, my ex-wife and I lived at the same address with other friends/roommates.
• Both of use were students , later converted to PGWP and received ITA in March 2024.
• We rented the property together with the other roommates. Rent and groceries were shared as roommates.
• We did not have any joint bank accounts, joint assets, or other financial interdependence.
• Filed taxes sep as single
• We each applied for our own immigration applications independently.
• Neither of us ever sponsored the other.
• We both obtained permanent residence independently in October 2024.
• Our parents later arranged our marriage after proposals were discussed, and we got married after we had both become permanent residents.
• Both us got married in May 2025 and got divorced in Oct 2025

I am now sponsoring my new spouse through an outland spousal sponsorship.


My concern is that IRCC will see that my ex-wife and I had the same residential address before we became permanent residents.


My questions are:

1. Is a shared address alone enough for IRCC to conclude that we were common-law before becoming permanent residents?
2. In a situation like mine, where we applied for PR separately, never sponsored each other, had roommates, no joint bank accounts, no joint finances, tax filed sep and married only after both of us became PRs, is this something that could realistically be viewed as misrepresentation?
3. Has anyone had a similar experience where IRCC questioned a previous shared address under these circumstances?

I am looking for general experiences and opinions from people familiar with IRCC processes.

 

[CanGoldDigger]

1. No issue.
2. No.

 

[armoured]

1. It basically doesn't matter. You each applied for and received your PR status independently. You'll share your divorce info, sponsor your new spouse, that's it.
2. An essential aspect of misrepresentation is that it has to be 'material' in some way - usually meaning, would IRCC have evaluated it differently if they'd known, but here also that there was no potential benefit to each of you to have applied separately. You each got your PR status without sponsoring each other, so it's irrelevant.

[Warning to others: if one of you had received PR status and the other hadn't, THEN it might have caused issues because could potentially have been interpreted as common law, and the one might've had difficulty sponsoring the other. I'm not saying definitively, facts would matter, were you still living together this whole time, etc., there were roommates - but it is POSSIBLE it could have been seen after the fact as common law and hence misrepresentation and no spousal sponsorship possible.]

3. What 'similar circumstance do you mean? The key point in your case is you and your ex each got PR status indpendently, and then married and divorced later. The other stuff is a different case entirely (see my comments above).

The only thing of note (IMO) here is that your previous arranged marriage lasted only a few months and now a year later you're re-marrying. It doesn't look great, but it does happen. On the other hand your ex was not sponsored and so no sign of some kind of immigration shenanigans.

 

[pooky73]

I think the only red flag might be that you are sponsoring a new spouse only 9 months after divorcing your first spouse with whom you were only married 5 months.