truesmile said:
I would say so "yes". That letter will not even be sufficient to allow you to board a plane, let alone re-enter Canada.
For clarification: entering Canada is the easy part. All a PR really has to do is establish identity . . . the system will verify status (but this goes easier if the PR has some documentation to show PR status, CoPR for example, expired PR card, or in this instance, even the letter).
Boarding a flight destined for Canada is the hurdle. This can be worked around for those who can travel via the U.S., and then travel via private vehicle to Canada via a land border POE.
While there is a window of time in which it might still be possible to board a flight without presenting a valid PR card or PR Travel Document, until at the latest March 14, no one here can reliably predict the extent to which this is still practically available. The rule is that a PR is required to present a PR card or PR TD. This rule becomes definitively enforced as of March 15. In the meantime, to attempt to board a flight by presenting a visa-exempt passport may be possible but it is also possible it will not be allowed.
Clarification regarding H&C determination: the observation by some about the PR card coming after a H&C determination, I suspect that is about individuals applying for PR based on H&C grounds, which if granted means the individual becomes a PR and yes indeed will be issued a PR card automatically. Refugees who landed yesterday in Toronto, for example, were granted PR status and the government prepared ahead of time (according to media reports anyway) to deliver SIN and PR cards.
The OP's situation, however, is about a H&C determination in adjudicating a 44(1) Report for inadmissibility due to non-compliance with the PR Residency Obligation. That is a different process. Different outcome. Outcome is that the OP's PR status is retained, it continues to be valid.
My understanding is that he can indeed now
apply for a new PR card, and is not risking a Residency Determination which would result in the loss of PR status . . . but I am
not certain of this.
I am far more confident he can now
not worry about a PR RO examination at a POE upon returning to Canada, at least so long as the absence he is returning from is relatively short.
The other unknown has to do with what will happen if he applies for a PR TD while abroad. Again, my understanding is that the visa office
should credit the H&C determination and thus issue a PR TD. But there are too many reports of vagaries and problems in processing PR TD applications abroad to overlook the potential for the visa office to deny the PR TD, requiring going through the appeal process, with a risk of losing due to a technicality even if the merits are favourable.
For many of the questions posed, there is no definite answer. There are RISKS involved.
The main thing is that there has been, it appears, a formal H&C determination, and thus the overall risk is now greatly reduced. For those PRs with less than 730 days presence but
strong H&C reasons, this is the advantage of a full examination into the PR RO at the POE, since a formal favourable decision does not leave the PR in the precarious position of having to stay below the radar for an entire two years.
