Common law partner- 12 months

[hecapoole]

Hi there!

My boyfriend (who is a canadian citizen) and I are living together and planning on applying for sponsorship through the common law route. We can show we have been living together as a married couple, joint accounts, same address etc.

However although in total we will be living together for a year, my question is about taking breaks during this time, not from the relationship but for vacation. Is he allowed to leave the country without me for a week lets say for a holiday or will this invalidate our common law relationship? I ask because on the cic website it explains breaks for business and family matters so I thought he wouldn't be able to do this but other people we have asked say it's ok?

Please end this confusion. Thanks for your help!

 

[Leon]

Small breaks for vacations or work here and there are no problem.

 

[raycrawford]

It states you may have short periods apart for family or business reasons. I e mailed CIC and asked what is considered a short period of time. I was told they cannot tell me that.

I am thinking what would be acceptable is what a normal person would take for a vacation, say two to three weeks?

Any thoughts re this?

Regards,

Raymond

 

[RobsLuv]

From the OP2 Processing Manual - Section 5.35

What is cohabitation?
“Cohabitation” means “living together.” Two people who are cohabiting have combined their affairs
and set up their household together in one dwelling. To be considered common-law partners, they
must have cohabited for at least one year. This is the standard definition used across the federal
government. It means continuous cohabitation for one year, not intermittent cohabitation
adding up to one year. The continuous nature of the cohabitation is a universal understanding
based on case law.
While cohabitation means living together continuously, from time to time, one or the other partner
may have left the home for work or business travel, family obligations, and so on. The separation
must be temporary and short."

The reason they won't specifically define "temporary and short" is because it's left to the discretion of the VO assessing the application. They will factor into their overall assessment whatever "absences" may have occurred, and decide whether they seem reasonable within the context of the partnership.