Inland Common-Law Sponsorship: Sponsor travelling during the one year Common Law period

[zzyzxx]

Hello!

My partner and I have recently have moved in together and wanted to start preparing what the next year will look like for us to be ready for my sponsorship process. My partner is the Sponsor, and a citizen, and I am the principal applicant. She has been planning to travel/work in France in the summer for an indefinite period(approx. 1 1/2 months-3 months). Would this potentially be an issue when we submit our application early next year? What can we do to minimize this being an issue when determining our eligibility for Common Law status? (she is willing to adjust her plans accordingly, but I would prefer her to continue with her plans as much as possible.) Also, if you have any general advice for what we can do starting now to make the sponsorship process smoother that would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks

 

[scylla]

Hello!

My partner and I have recently have moved in together and wanted to start preparing what the next year will look like for us to be ready for my sponsorship process. My partner is the Sponsor, and a citizen, and I am the principal applicant. She has been planning to travel/work in France in the summer for an indefinite period(approx. 1 1/2 months-3 months). Would this potentially be an issue when we submit our application early next year? What can we do to minimize this being an issue when determining our eligibility for Common Law status? (she is willing to adjust her plans accordingly, but I would prefer her to continue with her plans as much as possible.) Also, if you have any general advice for what we can do starting now to make the sponsorship process smoother that would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks

Yes, this will be an issue.

To be considered as common law, you must live together continuously for at least one full year. Generally speaking, IRCC will accept absences of up to 3 weeks. The period she plans to be away (1.5 - 3 months) is too long. This will be classified as a break in continuous cohabitation and you'll need to start the 12 months from scratch ones she returns.

Your options are: (1) keep the summer break to 3 weeks or less; (2) you travel with her to France for the 1.5-3 months; (3) forget about common law and get married; (4) don't change anything and wait another six months to qualify for common law restarting the 12 month calculation once she returns from her time in France.

 

[zzyzxx]

Yes, this will be an issue.

To be considered as common law, you must live together continuously for at least one full year. Generally speaking, IRCC will accept absences of up to 3 weeks. The period she plans to be away (1.5 - 3 months) is too long. This will be classified as a break in continuous cohabitation and you'll need to start the 12 months from scratch ones she returns.

Your options are: (1) keep the summer break to 3 weeks or less; (2) you travel with her to France for the 1.5-3 months; (3) forget about common law and get married; (4) don't change anything and wait another six months to qualify for common law restarting the 12 month calculation once she returns from her time in France.

Thanks for the quick reply

Would there be any work-arounds for this? Such as, returning temporarily and leaving again for another 3-4 week time period. Or myself accompanying her for the last 1-2 weeks/joining in later during her trip, etc.

Also how would the IRCC know exactly about these travel dates and what not?

 

[scylla]

Thanks for the quick reply

Would there be any work-arounds for this? Such as, returning temporarily and leaving again for another 3-4 week time period. Or myself accompanying her for the last 1-2 weeks she is there thus making her total trip 5~ weeks or so, etc.

Also how would the IRCC know exactly about these travel dates and what not?

IMO, returning temporarily will not work. It will just look like you're trying to game the system.

The second option may work although I'm not quite clear on the details. If she is out of Canada for 5 weeks, you would need to make sure you spend at least 2 of those week with her and have hard evidence to cohabitated during this time.

She will need to declare her history in her application. Failure to answer truthfully is misrepresentation which is a refusal and a potential for a 5 year ban from Canada.

 

[zzyzxx]

IMO, returning temporarily will not work. It will just look like you're trying to game the system.

The second option may work although I'm not quite clear on the details. If she is out of Canada for 5 weeks, you would need to make sure you spend at least 2 of those week with her and have hard evidence to cohabitated during this time.

She will need to declare her history in her application. Failure to answer truthfully is misrepresentation which is a refusal and a potential for a 5 year ban from Canada.

In which section will we have to declare this history? Her accommodation will be provided by a family member, so if i do accompany her, it will most likely not have a hard confirmation like with a hotel reservation, but we do plan to travel to other cities with more concrete reservation documents.

*Edit: more pertinent question: after the one year establishing period for common law, and we have already submitted the sponsorship application. Is the sponsor allowed to travel for much longer periods?

 

[armoured]

*Edit: more pertinent question: after the one year establishing period for common law, and we have already submitted the sponsorship application. Is the sponsor allowed to travel for much longer periods?

What is your (the applicant's) status in Canada?

If an inland application, yes, the two are expected to live together. If your own status is independent of your spouse's (you do not need the inland app to remain legally in Canada), your most simple alternative is to get married (eg now) and apply outland. In that scenario, living together - even with breaks - is solid additional evidence of relationship and no longer a critical qualification.

(There's no issue with applying outland even if physically in Canada).

 

[zzyzxx]

What is your (the applicant's) status in Canada?

If an inland application, yes, the two are expected to live together. If your own status is independent of your spouse's (you do not need the inland app to remain legally in Canada), your most simple alternative is to get married (eg now) and apply outland. In that scenario, living together - even with breaks - is solid additional evidence of relationship and no longer a critical qualification.

(There's no issue with applying outland even if physically in Canada).

I am currently on a PGWP, expiring Nov. 2023. (Planning to apply by end of January 2023, with an OWP extension.)

"After the one year period of cohabitation has been established, the partners may live apart for periods of time while still maintaining a common-law relationship. For example, a couple may have been separated due to illness or death of a family member, adverse country conditions (e.g. war, political unrest), or employment or education-related reasons, and therefore are not cohabiting at the time an application is submitted."

Doesn't this section imply that cohabitation is recommended at the time of application submission, but once the 12 month cohabitation has been established and was submitted while cohabiting, there isn't necessarily a mandate to remain cohabitating without extended periods of seperation while the application is being processed?

 

[YVR123]

I am currently on a PGWP, expiring Nov. 2023. (Planning to apply by end of January 2023, with an OWP extension.)

"After the one year period of cohabitation has been established, the partners may live apart for periods of time while still maintaining a common-law relationship. For example, a couple may have been separated due to illness or death of a family member, adverse country conditions (e.g. war, political unrest), or employment or education-related reasons, and therefore are not cohabiting at the time an application is submitted."

Doesn't this section imply that cohabitation is recommended at the time of application submission, but once the 12 month cohabitation has been established and was submitted while cohabiting, there isn't necessarily a mandate to remain cohabitating without extended periods of seperation while the application is being processed?

There are 2 parts of it. Once you have lived continously for 12 month, and have the proof of cohabitation, then it's OK to have a short break. Since you just recently moved in, I don't think that's your case if your partner plans to travel this summer.

If you want to apply inland, you and your partner needs to live together during the process. The alternative is to apply outland and that does have the requirement of the sponsor and the PA living together in Canada.

 

[armoured]

The alternative is to apply outland and that does have the requirement of the sponsor and the PA living together in Canada.

Am I right that this is a typo and you meant to say "does NOT have the requirement ... of living together."?

 

[YVR123]

Am I right that this is a typo and you meant to say "does NOT have the requirement ... of living together."?

It was a typo. I meant DOES NOT have the requirement of living together for outland.

 

[armoured]

I am currently on a PGWP, expiring Nov. 2023. (Planning to apply by end of January 2023, with an OWP extension.)

This is good, in that you do not NEED to do the inland application (your own status will be enough to let you continue to work in Canada).

Doesn't this section imply that cohabitation is recommended at the time of application submission, but once the 12 month cohabitation has been established and was submitted while cohabiting, there isn't necessarily a mandate to remain cohabitating without extended periods of seperation while the application is being processed?

If yo apply inland, you must continue to reside together in Canada. So basically the same issue as for common law. Outland this is not a requirement (there are some other nuances but not important for this discussion).

Again, it's your decision, but marriage will make the process much easier.

I underline: it absolutely is possible to be rejected for not having complied with/met the cohabitation requirements under common law. If IRCC decides you have not resided together the one year, that's it. (You can appeal, re-apply, but that does take quite a lot of time)

 

[scylla]

I am currently on a PGWP, expiring Nov. 2023. (Planning to apply by end of January 2023, with an OWP extension.)

"After the one year period of cohabitation has been established, the partners may live apart for periods of time while still maintaining a common-law relationship. For example, a couple may have been separated due to illness or death of a family member, adverse country conditions (e.g. war, political unrest), or employment or education-related reasons, and therefore are not cohabiting at the time an application is submitted."

Doesn't this section imply that cohabitation is recommended at the time of application submission, but once the 12 month cohabitation has been established and was submitted while cohabiting, there isn't necessarily a mandate to remain cohabitating without extended periods of seperation while the application is being processed?

This is accurate if you apply outland only. It's not accurate for inland. One of the other requirements of the inland process is that you must continue cohabitating in Canada with your Canadian spouse / common law partner while the application is processed.

If you don't want the obligation to continue to cohabitate after the 12 months (or want the flexibility for extended travel / periods of separation), apply outland. There's no OWP with outland but it will solve the cohabitation issue if that's your bigger priority.