Marriage. Sponsorship

[Josephmyatt1996]

Hey guys!
My partner and I have been apart for almost 12 months now while I’m in Australia serving a one year exclusion order which ends in December.
We are currently working on a common law spousal sponsorship application with a lawyer together. We have been engaged for almost a year and together for four years and she’s 20 weeks pregnant with our first child.
she’s thinking about visiting me in Australia for the second time this year and we are thinking about getting married while she’s here.
in people’s experience or knowledge, are married spousal sponsorship applications easer than common law applications?
I did ask my lawyer but I do not think she’s legally allowed to say they are.
thankyou!

 

[armoured]

are married spousal sponsorship applications easer than common law applications?
I did ask my lawyer but I do not think she’s legally allowed to say they are.

Why do you think the lawyer's not legally allowed to say something? Nonsense.

Bluntly, your primary issue is the exclusion order - about which I don't have anything to say, nor have you provided any info of relevance.

Married easier than common law: it depends. What you haven't explained is whether or not you meet the common law test of having resided together, 12 months, continuously, at some point in past.

Because here's the thing: the only hard parts of common law are 1) actually meeting that test (some people do fail that test), and 2) demonstrating that you meet that test. Those are obviously related concepts but not identical: there is some subjectivity about what constitutes sufficient evidence to demonstrate that two people resided together for 12 months, straight. For those cases that are easy (eg well in excess of 12 months, plentiful evidence, etc), it's not substantially different than demonstrating being married.

Roughly, being married collapses both of those concepts into one single legal test: you are married, and you have the legal documents to prove it. There is not much subjectivity involved.

The scrutiny of the subjective info in a common law case might be higher if the applicant has other issues - like an exclusion order. But it's entirely possible that the only real issue is the exclusion order.

 

[Josephmyatt1996]

I appreciate your reply and knowledge.
I was given a one year exclusion for overstaying my Visa last December.
I’ve been back in Australia since December 15th, and my exclusion ends on the same date later this year. Hoping to go back around that date.
We lived together in our apartment from September 2019 up until I had to leave in December 2022
I have paid all bills and rent since the day I left and will continue to do so.

 

[armoured]

I appreciate your reply and knowledge.
I was given a one year exclusion for overstaying my Visa last December.
I’ve been back in Australia since December 15th, and my exclusion ends on the same date later this year. Hoping to go back around that date.
We lived together in our apartment from September 2019 up until I had to leave in December 2022
I have paid all bills and rent since the day I left and will continue to do so.

I do not know much about exclusion orders so won't comment on that aspect.

Having lived together for two years plus, assuming you have good documentation of this (lease etc), meeting the practical requirements of common law (documentation mostly) should not be difficult.

That said, as I repeat here often: all things being equal, married application is 'better than'* common law (because it's the same relationship evidence plus legal proof thereof). The difference may not be large, but still better.

BUT: what matters is if you would have to delay your application to get married first. That's a trade-off, extra time to get married vs speed/certainty of being married first. My guess is you shouldn't delay your app to get married (apply whenever you can/you are ready). Marginal benefit of waiting probably too small to wait in your case (unless extra time to get married is small). If you get married after submitting the application, provide marriage certificate to IRCC when available.

Only a guess though.

*Actually properly formulated, it might technically be 'better than or equal to'. But logically if the applicant doesn't know for certain that it's equal to, then it is still 'better than.' (I used to do formal logic and stuff like that; it's a sickness. You can safely ignore this footnote)