Can a person without status in Canada submit an Outland application?

[Ponga]

Just trying to add some visibility to a healthy debate that's occurring in another thread.

While it's known that a person can be in Canada (living/working/studying/etc.) and apply for spousal sponsorship via an Outland application...can a person without status also apply with an Outland application?

I was informed (by more than one credible source) that a person in Canada, without status, that wished to remain in Canada while their PR was being processed, had no choice but to submit an Inland application, but...I'm now being educated that this is incorrect information; that an out of status person can remain in Canada, apply via an Outland application and hope that they are not removed.

Hmmm...true?

 

[truesmile]

Well, since you said "HOPE they are not removed" ... absolutely you CAN. You may wish to make your sponsor an "authorized representative" at which point his/her address is what the forms ask for.

 

[Ponga]

Wow! With the CBSA Administrative Deferral of Removal (once in place to protect those with an Inland application submitted that we're out of status) apparently no longer in effect, this would imply that the chances of being removed are the same, no matter which option is chosen.

The guide for the Inland application states that legal status is no longer a requirement, but that same language is not found in the Outland guide.

Gotta love CIC for making this crystal clear!

So...why would anyone (such as an American) choose Inland now?

 

[truesmile]

Exactly!

 

[rhcohen2014]

So...why would anyone (such as an American) choose Inland now?

right? people are dumb and don't want to have to be apart long term, that's why! or they aren't not informed and believe it's the only way to be in canada. It's not. Of course someone can be out of status and apply outland. If they don't have status in canada, they are from somewhere else, right? CIC has no idea where someone is when they send in the application, only by the information that is given in the app. So if someone's home country is somewhere else, that applicant has the ability to be processed as outland. Whether a person has overstayed or is out of status has no bearing of where the application is going to be sent, in my opinion. All it does is suggest to CBSA and CIC the applicant doesn't want to follow the rules, and they don't like that too much. I'm not even sure how quickly CBSA and CIC communicate information about status issues, so technically i'm sure it's possible to remain out of status for the entire processing of outland.

 

[chakrab]

well call me dumb but i don't understand one thing. outland applications presume that the spouse is not in canada (for most cases). so how exactly is the status in canada important? even if the spouse is out of status and have to leave canada, he or she can go back to their home country and continue with the application.

i believe, for outland, the applicant is the sponsor. so how can the applicant be out of status? or are we talking about expired PR?

 

[Rob_TO]

Wow! With the CBSA Administrative Deferral of Removal (once in place to protect those with an Inland application submitted that we're out of status) apparently no longer in effect, this would imply that the chances of being removed are the same, no matter which option is chosen.

Despite what official rules there are on paper, I still think that CBSA will only take action to remove someone with an active INLAND application in progress, in the most extreme of circumstances. In reality if you have an inland app in progress, you are most likely "safe" from possible removal due to "implied" status.

People with outland apps though will be more easily removed.

So basically the only reason someone visa-exempt should choose inland over outland, is if they are out-of-status in Canada and really want to stay here during processing, but feel if they ever leave they will not be allowed back in.

In practically all normal cases outland is the obvious better choice.

 

[chakrab]

Despite what official rules there are on paper, I still think that CBSA will only take action to remove someone with an active INLAND application in progress, in the most extreme of circumstances. In reality if you have an inland app in progress, you are most likely "safe" from possible removal due to "implied" status.

People with outland apps though will be more easily removed.

So basically the only reason someone visa-exempt should choose inland over outland, is if they are out-of-status in Canada and really want to stay here during processing, but feel if they ever leave they will not be allowed back in.

In practically all normal cases outland is the obvious better choice.

hey rob, doesn't implied status generally mean that the person was in status during the application (at least according to the CIC) and will lose status during the process?

 

[Rob_TO]

hey rob, doesn't implied status generally mean that the person was in status during the application (at least according to the CIC) and will lose status during the process?

I'm really not sure. So many things about "implied" status are unwritten rules not confirmed on paper by CIC anywhere. I still think though that it's only very rare cases where CBSA will take actions to deport an inland applicant, despite whether they had valid status or not before submitting the app.

We've actually seen cases where CBSA has started the removal process on someone, the person then submitted an inland app, and CBSA backed off. So obviously it's taken into consideration in removal cases.

 

[Ponga]

hey rob, doesn't implied status generally mean that the person was in status during the application (at least according to the CIC) and will lose status during the process?

Yes. If the applicant was out of status, there is no implied status...even if an OWP was submitted with the application.

 

[truesmile]

well call me dumb but i don't understand one thing. outland applications presume that the spouse is not in canada (for most cases). so how exactly is the status in canada important? even if the spouse is out of status and have to leave canada, he or she can go back to their home country and continue with the application.

i believe, for outland, the applicant is the sponsor. so how can the applicant be out of status? or are we talking about expired PR?

The terms "inland" and "outland" more correctly refer to WHERE the application will be "processed", NOT where the applicant is at any given time. Although with "inland" they had better be IN Canada.
The "applicant" is NEVER the "sponsor" and vice versa. "Applicants" can be IN Canada, but whose work permit, visit visa, or other has already expired. Hence, out of status.

 

[Ponga]

right? people are dumb and don't want to have to be apart long term, that's why! or they aren't not informed and believe it's the only way to be in canada. It's not. Of course someone can be out of status and apply outland. If they don't have status in canada, they are from somewhere else, right? CIC has no idea where someone is when they send in the application, only by the information that is given in the app. So if someone's home country is somewhere else, that applicant has the ability to be processed as outland. Whether a person has overstayed or is out of status has no bearing of where the application is going to be sent, in my opinion. All it does is suggest to CBSA and CIC the applicant doesn't want to follow the rules, and they don't like that too much. I'm not even sure how quickly CBSA and CIC communicate information about status issues, so technically i'm sure it's possible to remain out of status for the entire processing of outland.

Part of this is, once again, ambiguity from CIC.

Why does the guide for an Inland application state that legal status is no longer a requirement, while the Outland guide does not? Because they assume that an Outland applicant is NOT in Canada, or because they don't want to encourage a person in Canada, without status, to apply Outland, or...the Inland `wait' is a form of punishment for the person letting their status expire.
Aha! That's it!!

I do wonder why CIC hasn't updated ip08 to reflect the suspension of the CBSA program for Deferral of Removal for an Inland applicant that reportedly ended nearly 3 years ago. I suspect that the ONLY reason that an American would be applying Inland is if they are out of status and think that they are protected...which apparently they are NOT.

 

[steerpike]

Part of this is, once again, ambiguity from CIC.

Why does the guide for an Inland application state that legal status is no longer a requirement, while the Outland guide does not? Because they assume that an Outland applicant is NOT in Canada, or because they don't want to encourage a person in Canada, without status, to apply Outland, or...the Inland `wait' is a form of punishment for the person letting their status expire.
Aha! That's it!!

I do wonder why CIC hasn't updated ip08 to reflect the suspension of the CBSA program for Deferral of Removal for an Inland applicant that reportedly ended nearly 3 years ago. I suspect that the ONLY reason that an American would be applying Inland is if they are out of status and think that they are protected...which apparently they are NOT.

You dont need a visa to apply outland because you arent supposed to be in canada in the first place. Talking about valid visas on the outland app would likely just confuse a bunch of people.

As for your question why would anyone apply inland: because not everyone is an american, and inland is actually fasterr for a lot of people.

I am not sure if people who apply outland but remain in canada on a visa are technically qualified to appeal. The "reasoning" CIC uses to deny inland applicants the chance to appeal is based on the fact that they are not applying for status (they already have some kind of status) they are only applying for PR. Outland can appeal because they are applying for status and a PR. So outlands, who already have status , may not be able to appeal. It would be interesting to know.

 

[chakrab]

The terms "inland" and "outland" more correctly refer to WHERE the application will be "processed", NOT where the applicant is at any given time. Although with "inland" they had better be IN Canada.
The "applicant" is NEVER the "sponsor" and vice versa. "Applicants" can be IN Canada, but whose work permit, visit visa, or other has already expired. Hence, out of status.

I got the term applicant from CIC site.

For Outland, there's no "applicant" term in the document checklist.
It's Sponsor and Sponsored person.
The sponsor is supposed to submit the application. Hence why I term the sponsor as the applicant.

For Inland, CIC mentions Applicant and Sponsor in the document checklist. They mention the sponsored spouse to submit the application.

 

[rhcohen2014]

I got the term applicant from CIC site.

For Outland, there's no "applicant" term in the document checklist.
It's Sponsor and Sponsored person.
The sponsor is supposed to submit the application. Hence why I term the sponsor as the applicant.

I don't think this is entirely accurate. i applied outland, and i'm pretty sure there are places on the application where I am referred to as the "primary applicant".