ALL SPOUSE APPEAL CASES COME HERE AND JOIN US PLZ

[Abe1004]

So its been two weeks and three days from moment of my hearing.

No answer yet, but my attorney met up with CBSA representative who said that he went through some details with judge and felt like we are definetly real. Guess thats good.

 

[Hope1316]

When did you legally get married? Before or after he applied, and before or after he became PR? Or are you only referring to him as husband in the common-law sense?


We are still refer ourself as girlfriend/boyfriend at that time . He is still hoing home to his family suring that time . And we can prove it since we both have different address. We married after after he got his pr status.

 

[wait_so_long]

When did you legally get married? Before or after he applied, and before or after he became PR? Or are you only referring to him as husband in the common-law sense?

We are still refer ourself as girlfriend/boyfriend at that time . He is still hoing home to his family suring that time . And we can prove it since we both have different address. We married after after he got his pr status.

Your husband may need to engage a lawyer, to see if there is a way to salvage this. At the very least, to make sure you don't ruin whatever chance you might still have to re-apply. It seems that each party had a different interpretation of your circumstances at the time, as well as what was meant by living common-law.

As sponsor, your husband would have had to submit the application, is that right? He didn't catch the contradiction before he sent it in? So, this was a eligibility refusal, without a chance for appeal, is that right?

First step is determining whether you were indeed in a common-law relationship at the time:

http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/Eng/BoaCom/references/LegJur/Documents/SpoPar05_e.pdf

Good luck.

 

[Hope1316]

Your husband may need to engage a lawyer, to see if there is a way to salvage this. At the very least, to make sure you don't ruin whatever chance you might still have to re-apply. It seems that each party had a different interpretation of your circumstances at the time, as well as what was meant by living common-law.

As sponsor, your husband would have had to submit the application, is that right? He didn't catch the contradiction before he sent it in? So, this was a eligibility refusal, without a chance for appeal, is that right
First step is determining whewere indeed in a common-law
Good luck.

Ive read the link you gave me and it said that in order to be prove you were in common law you should be both in conjugal relationship, me and my husband still not in conjugal relationship at that time for he is not financially supporting me. We dont have any joint accounts together nor living in our own. Because my parents my parents still financially supporting at that time. He didnt even gave any money to pay out bills. Because my parents still thinh it is not right for he is still going home to his family for a week or two every month. Do you think we have a chance?

 

[wait_so_long]

Ive read the link you gave me and it said that in order to be prove you were in common law you should be both in conjugal relationship, me and my husband still not in conjugal relationship at that time for he is not financially supporting me. We dont have any joint accounts together nor living in our own. Because my parents my parents still financially supporting at that time. He didnt even gave any money to pay out bills. Because my parents still thinh it is not right for he is still going home to his family for a week or two every month. Do you think we have a chance?

In your application, did you only say that you have been living together for three years? Did you also say it was a common-law relationship, or was it CIC that concluded that it was a common-law relationship? Was that the only reason they gave for refusal? Did your refusal letter spell out what your options were?

I don't know all the details of your relationship, and your application, but I think you should be able to make a case that your relationship at the time did not meet the criteria of a common-law relationship, as defined in IRPA.

Again, I'd like to suggest that you seek legal counsel in order to avoid a mis-step that might have lasting consequences. Or try posting your question in the broader Family Class Sponsorship section of the forum rather than the Appeals section, as it doesn't sound like your refusal can be appealed. Your case is different though, in that most couples are trying to prove a common-law relationship, whereas you are trying to disprove it.

 

[Hope1316]

In your application, did you only say that you have been living together for three years? Did you also say it was a common-law relationship, or was it CIC that concluded that it was a common-law relationship? Was that the only reason they gave for refusal?

I don't know all the details of your relationship, and your application, but I think you should be able to make a case that your relationship at the time did not meet the criteria of a common-law relationship, as defined in IRPA.

Again, I'd like to suggest that you seek legal counsel in order to avoid a mis-step that might have lasting consequences. Or try posting your question in the broader Family Class Sponsorship section of the forum rather than the Appeals section, as it doesn't sound like your refusal can be appealed. Your case is different though, in that most couples are trying to prove a common-law relationship, whereas you are trying to disprove it.

Did your refusal letter spell out your options?

Thank you for the reply, our application was sent to cm-misuaga and after a month we recieve a letter that my husband not eligble to sponsor cause he didnt declare me as common law before , they still sent our application for further processing. I didnt still recieve any refusal yet but i know for sure it would be refuse. Thats why im trying to figure out now what to do.

 

[Hope1316]

In your application, did you only say that you have been living together for three years? Did you also say it was a common-law relationship, or was it CIC that concluded that it was a common-law relationship? Was that the only reason they gave for refusal? Did your refusal letter spell out what your options were?

I don't know all the details of your relationship, and your application, but I think you should be able to make a case that your relationship at the time did not meet the criteria of a common-law relationship, as defined in IRPA.

Again, I'd like to suggest that you seek legal counsel in order to avoid a mis-step that might have lasting consequences. Or try posting your question in the broader Family Class Sponsorship section of the forum rather than the Appeals section, as it doesn't sound like your refusal can be appealed. Your case is different though, in that most couples are trying to prove a common-law relationship, whereas you are trying to disprove it.

In my application ive only wrote living together im not stating that we were in common law relationship. Because even myself still consider ourself girlfriend/ boyfriend stage. Even people around us and friend know that we are just boyfriend/ girlfriend. He doesnt even have any valuable to things to my parents house only his clothes.
Thank you for replying always

 

[Hope1316]

The fact that you stated you were living together for 3 years is enough for CIC to disqualify your sponsor, as he did not declare you as a common law partner before.

"IRCC states that a common-law partner:

*Is not legally married to you,
*Is of the opposite sex or the same sex as you,
*Is 18 years old or older, and
*Has been living with you for at least 12 consecutive months. That means you have been living together continuously for one year, without any long periods apart. One of you may have left the home for work or business travel, family obligations, and so on. That separation must have been temporary and short."


But they also state that being in common law relationship need to be in conjugal relationship too

 

[wintersnow]

Conjugal means anything regarding a relationship of a married couple. If you live together and display any behavior that is consistent with a couple then you are conjugal. You did mention you consider yourselves as boyfriend/girlfriend.

I think by definition your relationship is conjugal. I think you are confused by this definition ... it does not have anything to do with your husband supporting you.

CIC has no option but consider your relationship common-law ... because you said you were living together for 3 years. Your comment about him returning home for a week or 2 every month probably won't make them change their mind. It sounds a little argumentative.

It sounds to me like your husband just made a mistake in not declaring your common law relationship. I mean is there any advantage in not declaring it? What would be your motive? Maybe your relationship with your parents makes you think living together is bad and you both feel awkward calling it "common-law". Or maybe you just didn't understand the definition. Or maybe you just made a mistake.

Either way ... I think your best approach is to somehow explain that you made an innocent mistake ... that you did not understand the meaning of common-law.

I'm with wait_so_long on this one ... you should probably get a lawyer.

 

[wait_so_long]

The fact that you stated you were living together for 3 years is enough for CIC to disqualify your sponsor, as he did not declare you as a common law partner before.

"IRCC states that a common-law partner:

*Is not legally married to you,
*Is of the opposite sex or the same sex as you,
*Is 18 years old or older, and
*Has been living with you for at least 12 consecutive months. That means you have been living together continuously for one year, without any long periods apart. One of you may have left the home for work or business travel, family obligations, and so on. That separation must have been temporary and short."

This can be contested, as the boyfriend still went "home" for a period of one or two weeks every month, and that most of his possessions were still in the "home" that he shared with his parents, and not that of his girlfriend's parents. And that nobody in their respective circles, themselves included, considered them to be anything more than just boyfriend/girlfriend. At the very least, there should be enough of a gray area to explain why the husband, then boyfriend, would not have considered themselves to be common-law at the time of his application. And neither did his wife, at the time of her application. Their relationship was most likely conjugal, but whether or not it was common-law is debatable - but not something that they would necessarily want to contest, either. But I'm not a lawyer. I don't even play one on TV.

Is this like with a child, in which if you didn't declare a child in your application, you are FOREVER barred from sponsoring that child? If so, I think they need the services of a real lawyer.

 

[Abe1004]

Wonder how much longer before we hear something.

Its one thing to wait on process, totally different to wait on the reuslts of hearing...this wait is worse than waiting for the hearing or process itself.

Given that we win this time, is there other reasons we might get denied given the medicals and criminal are clean?

 

[wait_so_long]

Wonder how much longer before we hear something.

Its one thing to wait on process, totally different to wait on the reuslts of hearing...this wait is worse than waiting for the hearing or process itself.

Given that we win this time, is there other reasons we might get denied given the medicals and criminal are clean?

From what I've seen in this forum, if there is no ruling at the hearing, people generally wait from 60-90 days for a decision. Might be different, depending on the jurisdiction, and the adjudicator. It may also vary from case to case. Your lawyer would have a better idea.

With respect to the background checks:

http://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/background-checks-explained-t39578.0.html
http://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/background-checks-explained-t39578.0.html;msg5046616#msg5046616

 

[Hope1316]

This can be contested, as the boyfriend still went "home" for a period of one or two weeks every month, and that most of his possessions were still in the "home" that he shared with his parents, and not that of his girlfriend's parents. And that nobody in their respective circles, themselves included, considered them to be anything more than just boyfriend/girlfriend. At the very least, there should be enough of a gray area to explain why the husband, then boyfriend, would not have considered themselves to be common-law at the time of his application. And neither did his wife, at the time of her application. Their relationship was most likely conjugal, but whether or not it was common-law is debatable - but not something that they would necessarily want to contest, either. But I'm not a lawyer. I don't even play one on TV.

Is this like with a child, in which if you didn't declare a child in your application, you are FOREVER barred from sponsoring that child? If so, I think they need the services of a real lawyer.

No we dont still have a child. And we want to clarify too that we both uses different adress for we are bozh still resident of diferrent address

 

[Hope1316]

What actions have you taken so far? Were you to send them a CSE about your concerns? I hope you can still be given a chance to explain yourselves.

We didnt have any action because email said we need first to wait for the decision of the vo before making appeal. Do you have any idea how can we explain our side and went to sent the explaination letter even the decision was still not made?

 

[wait_so_long]

We didnt have any action because email said we need first to wait for the decision of the vo before making appeal. Do you have any idea how can we explain our side and went to sent the explaination letter even the decision was still not made?

That's a good sign that you will be given a chance to appeal once the decision has been made. They may even give you a chance to clear up the issue at the interview stage.