Declaring common-law

[JerBear123]

Is it a legal requirement to declare common-law in EE application (I am applying through CEC stream)?

The question is because my CRS score will actually be higher if my status is set to single instead of common-law. However, I am indeed living co-ed with my partner for over 1 year so technically I satisfy the requirement for common-law.

In other words, will it be considered misrepresentation with CIC if I declare my marital status as "single"? I am confused since CIC's policy is "the onus is on the applicant to proof common-law relationship".

 

[canuck78]

Is it a legal requirement to declare common-law in EE application (I am applying through CEC stream)?

The question is because my CRS score will actually be higher if my status is set to single instead of common-law. However, I am indeed living co-ed with my partner for over 1 year so technically I satisfy the requirement for common-law.

In other words, will it be considered misrepresentation with CIC if I declare my marital status as "single"? I am confused since CIC's policy is "the onus is on the applicant to proof common-law relationship".

Yes you must declare common-law or you would be misrepresenting your status and they must be included if you ever want to sponsor them. They can be included as non-accompanying. Are you currently living together? If so it may be difficult to justify them as non-accompanying. What is your CRS score with them?

 

[JerBear123]

Yes you must declare common-law or you would be misrepresenting your status and they must be included if you ever want to sponsor them. They can be included as non-accompanying. Are you currently living together? If so it may be difficult to justify them as non-accompanying. What is your CRS score with them?

It will be 471 vs 464, so a 7 point difference. The thing is this, my partner doesn't really need my sponsorship since she currently already qualifies to apply for BC PNP (paper method) and will be eligible for CEC sometime next year.

My concern is that is it a legal requirement to declare common-law status since I am new to this concept. It does not exist in my country of citizenship. The confusion comes since common law is de-facto instead of de-jure, which means it's not technically in the law. In other words, why will it be considered misrepresentation if there isn't a law contravening this?

I do not wish to break the law and definitely wish to stick with the rules, so I am just trying to understand this..

 

[canuck78]

It will be 471 vs 464, so a 7 point difference. The thing is this, my partner doesn't really need my sponsorship since she currently already qualifies to apply for BC PNP (paper method) and will be eligible for CEC sometime next year.

My concern is that is it a legal requirement to declare common-law status since I am new to this concept. It does not exist in my country of citizenship. The confusion comes since common law is de-facto instead of de-jure, which means it's not technically in the law. In other words, why will it be considered misrepresentation if there isn't a law contravening this?

I do not wish to break the law and definitely wish to stick with the rules, so I am just trying to understand this..

Not a legal requirement per se but it could result in your application being denied and with the inability to sponsor your common law. In your case you aren’t worried about sponsoring your common law but you are required to be honest on your application or else your application can be denied. The fact that you are common law should be on other documents like taxes. For that reason you need to be including your common law in your application. You can also try listing her as non-accompanying initially and the change to accompanying once you have been selected and have received AOR or leave her as non-accompanying. Others seem to have not been penalized for stating that their spouse or common law is non-accommodating while spouse is in Canada and have been successful. Are you currently living together in Canada and will you be for the foreseeable future. It does seem like if you don’t get selected for express entry your common law will soon apply for PR and can include you on their PR application. .

 

[JerBear123]

Not a legal requirement per se but it could result in your application being denied and with the inability to sponsor your common law. In your case you aren’t worried about sponsoring your common law but you are required to be honest on your application or else your application can be denied. The fact that you are common law should be on other documents like taxes. For that reason you need to be including your common law in your application. You can also try listing her as non-accompanying initially and the change to accompanying once you have been selected and have received AOR or leave her as non-accompanying. Others seem to have not been penalized for stating that their spouse or common law is non-accommodating while spouse is in Canada and have been successful. Are you currently living together in Canada and will you be for the foreseeable future. It does seem like if you don’t get selected for express entry your common law will soon apply for PR and can include you on their PR application. .

Thank you, yes we are currently living together in Canada. We both are working full-time on PGWP. Of course we both wish to get PR as soon as we can, but the concern will be that the cut-off for a draw might be between 464 and 471, and hence, I would miss what could be an ITA if I were to apply by myself. In that case it would have been better if I were to go with CEC by myself while she will apply using BC PNP.

Your suggestion to enter the EE pool stating common-law and non-accompanying seems like a feasible idea. My only concern will be whether it will raise eyebrows from IRCC when my ITA states "non-accompanying" but later in my e-APR states "accompanying".

 

[canuck78]

Thank you, yes we are currently living together in Canada. We both are working full-time on PGWP. Of course we both wish to get PR as soon as we can, but the concern will be that the cut-off for a draw might be between 464 and 471, and hence, I would miss what could be an ITA if I were to apply by myself. In that case it would have been better if I were to go with CEC by myself while she will apply using BC PNP.

Your suggestion to enter the EE pool stating common-law and non-accompanying seems like a feasible idea. My only concern will be whether it will raise eyebrows from IRCC when my ITA states "non-accompanying" but later in my e-APR states "accompanying".

You have the right to change. If there is an issue about your common law being in Canada then you’ll be sent a PFL. Would suggest at look at previous cases to see how some were treated although a few cases on this forum doesn’t guarantee all cases will be treated the same. If you want to apply with the higher CRS score having Them non-accompanying is your only option.

 

[canadain student]

Help urgent
I got invited in recent stem draw, I believe I made a big mistake though, as I now realized that I have been living more than 12 months with my girlfriend, so my status is actually common-law. It's all on me not familiarizing with those terms in the beginning, but assuming to be officially single at that time. Is it now too late to change from single to common-law post-ITA? We are soon getting married, and the idea was to include her in the application after submitting it, when we get the marriage certificate. So, if I continue and submit my application as a single, and I later add her to the application, they will likely find out that we have shared an address since 2021, and I can't imagine this leading to anything good.
. Any advice, how should I proceed to still have a chance at the PR?
Also My score increases with her, currently as single 515 and with her is 520.
What should I do