Additonal proof

[lrow]

Thanks Beshoo

I understand the case mentioned by you probalby is true when one of the partners is legally is settled in Canada and then the marraige took place. [ Case of "marriage of convenience" entered into for immigration pruposes ]

In our case though marraige took place around 1.5 years ago and we both had no immigration intention by then we lived together at same place in india for an year before coming to Canada together on work permit.

My wife got a Open work permit based on my work permit. So we both are temprary residents already.
Do we still need to send more documents in above case or Just marraige cert is fine ??

 

[BeShoo]

If you are both temporary residents, then you are not talking about a "family class sponsorship" unless there is some other family involved. This section of the board is for "family class sponsorships" which is why I was confused.

In the case of being sponsored by a wife or husband who already has permanent residence or citizenship, they would like to see that your marriage followed the customs of your particular culture. Some of these are traditional religious ceremonies of your religion and culture, invitations sent out to friends and family, friends and family who attended the ceremony, a banquet or reception after the ceremony, a honeymoon trip after the wedding. If whichever of these that applies to your traditions is lacking, they would want an explanation, and if it did take place, they'd like to see evidence that it did (copies of invitations, pictures, receipts, etc.). If they have doubts that you live together, they might ask questions to each spouse at an interview: what's his favourite colour, name her brothers and sisters, which drawer does he keep his socks in, etc., and see if the answers match. (The amount of time between the wedding and the application also helps prove it was not a marriage of convenience.)

In any case, I'm not sure any of this applies to you, unless one of you is going to be a permanent resident first and then will sponsor the other.

 

[lrow]

Agreed Beshoo .

Yes as you told my case is different. After reading your comment I noticed that by mistake I clicked at the wrong Visa category.
Thanks for good explanation

 

[ralu1150]

in the op2 it says:

People who are dating or who are thinking about marrying or living together and establishing a
common-law relationship are NOT yet in a conjugal relationship, nor are people who want to live
together to “try out” their relationship.

better not to mention marriage indeed.

 

[Holidaylove]

Yup i've scratched the idea of mentioning it. Already started getting friends and family writing there letters now

 

[matthewc]

Since common-law partners are required to live together in a conjugal relationship for one continuous year or more, applicants under the conjugal class can be expected to have been in their conjugal relationship for at least one year, even though they haven't been cohabiting.

You'll definitely need to show your relationship has been conjugal in nature for at least one year.

It actually sounds to me like there is a fair likelihood the IO will approve your application, as long as you show plenty of evidence that you've been in a genuine, conjugal relationship for over a year, but were unable to live together.

 

[Holidaylove]

Thanks matthewc

We are definetly staying positive. It's just a bump in the road.
Our immigration agent was actually stunned when we sent him the email we got. He said it is not common and he has never seen that before since the bar for approval is very high in that class. So he also said we were very lucky

Immigration process is definetly not for the faint at heart. Staying strong and keeping positive. Thanks for all your imput