It is obvious you have been making a concerted effort to recognize and provide good information, so I do not want to criticize you harshly or discourage your effort (indeed, I applaud and want to encourage you). And I am NO expert, so in many if not most respects my observations should be taken for what they are worth on their face, considered in conjunction with other sources and views.
Moreover, in regards to a topic in which a particular query is posed, in regards to a particular situation, such as is the case here, I try to minimize polemic tangents that are prone to divert or distract, tangents likely to confuse the OP more than help.
So I did not go into much detail regarding what in particular I disagreed with in the first paragraph of your observations, let alone why. I simply noted my disagreement and stated what is likely to most influence how it goes.
In contrast, as I noted, your second paragraph (in the post I was referencing and quoting) was an important one deserving emphasis, and so of course I entirely agreed with that.
Moreover, my previous observations did not go into a lot of detail about how these things go at the PoE. These details have been discussed at-length and in-depth many dozens of times in scores of other topics here.
Trying to sort out the influence of particular factors, and even more so particular aspects of this or that factor, gets very complicated and tends to be highly speculative. This is a big, big part of the reason that in general I am reluctant to comment on the probability of making a successful H&C case. There are many variables. Many, many variables. There is almost no limit to what factors can be considered. How this or that factor influences things can vary a lot, including the same factor having a virtually opposite influence for one individual compared to another, depending on context and how that factor relates to other factors. It can and often does get complicated.
I recently elaborated about this here:
https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-i...ccess-when-prtd-rejected.704337/#post-8885367
This brings the discussion back to why I simply disagreed with the first paragraph in the quoted post, which was:
"At the border, you will be allowed to enter Canada but will likely be reported for non-compliance with your RO and given a removal order, which you must appeal against within 30 days to keep your PR status. You will have to get a lawyer and argue why you should be allowed to keep your status, despite failing to meet your RO, based on humanitarian and compassionate (H&C) grounds. COVID isn't an H&C ground as it didn't stop you from living in Canada in 2017, 2018, and 2019. "
Let me start with the last part: "
COVID isn't an H&C ground as it didn't stop you from living in Canada in 2017, 2018, and 2019."
In contrast, I am confident that Covid-19 will be taken into consideration in any PR RO H&C evaluation for PRs arriving here in the next many months or year or so. Of course it is fair to note that Covid-19 did not stop a PR from coming to or staying in Canada prior to 2020. And this will likely have influence in how much this factor will help a PR. As you remind us, I have stated that "
those in breach before the global pandemic started, for example, will have a more difficult time getting much leniency based on the impact of Covid-19." To be clear about that statement, however, it does not suggest, let alone assert, that even for a PR who was in breach BEFORE the start of this pandemic, that the impact of covid-19 is not a ground for H&C relief; rather, it will be considered, in context, and its weight will depend on how it relates to the PR's situation considering many other aspects of the PR's situation . . . even if it is not likely the pandemic itself will be sufficient to obtain H&C relief.
Moreover, the odds are high that it is wrong to say any personal circumstance "
isn't an H&C ground." What is grounds for H&C relief in a PR RO breach case is rarely a [yes] or [no], [on] or [off] issue. It is almost always a matter of how much positive or negative weight the particular circumstance has in considering ALL aspects of the PR's situation. In some cases, it warrants noting, some factors are given both a positive weight and a negative weight. Explicitly, and described as such by IAD panels. (Ties in Canada based on having a spouse and/or minor children living in Canada can be both a positive and a negative factor, since it is a tie weighing favourably but that can be offset because it also shows that the PR, and the spouse and/or children, have managed, respectively, showing that in the course of the PR's life they all manage with the PR being abroad for such long periods of time. Employment choices can similarly have notoriously variable influence; in contrast to many forum participants saying that choosing to work abroad is not a H&C reason, there are times such choices HELP make the H&C case, and noting again I generally disagree with on/off characterizations in the RO H&C analysis.)
Trying to analyze the actual influence of given factors, let alone the net effect and outcome, is generally too speculative to be useful. The best that can be said in this regard is little more than pointing in the more likely direction . . . perhaps saying that this or that circumstance is likely to help, or hurt, help a lot, or hurt a lot. Trying to be any more specific than that is too speculative to be useful. Forecasting the outcome ("
likely be reported" for example), except in the most obvious cases, especially tends to be an exercise in unfruitful speculation.
The Pandemic In Particular:
Consider the impact of the pandemic and how it will influence a particular PR's H&C case: this will almost certainly will be very individual case specific. In this regard, I do NOT KNOW but I would anticipate that PRs still within the first five years of their landing are likely to be given more leeway, more leniency, based on the impact of the pandemic, than those who have been PRs for more than five years.
The following warrants further clarification:
"While OP was not "in breach" between 2017 and 2020 in a strictly legal sense, they still were not living in Canada prior to the pandemic, which is what I was getting at with my observation that COVID would not be an H&C reason in their case, as it did not prevent their return to Canada for the better part of the three years they were abroad."
In contrast, my strong impression is that any NEW PR (PR within the first five years) who was NOT already in breach of the RO at the beginning of this year, has good odds of being allowed a chance to keep PR status as long as the PR arrives here, in Canada, within the next . . . the
By-When part gets much harder to forecast. And of course varies as well, given how long the PR was abroad before this year.
I do think it can make a big difference (emphasis on what can or might happen, not what "
will" happen) whether the PR was technically in breach of the RO at the beginning of this year. It is not likely new PRs will get an automatic extension of the time within which they need to come to Canada to settle, BUT fairly likely their situations will be approached comparable to, in effect, being given a commensurate amount of leeway. Nearly the equivalent of an extension.
DEPENDING on other factors. (Thus, for example, and in particular, how soon the PR gets here can be a big factor . . . or at least how soon after the pandemic conditions abate.)
The latter is extrapolation, not reporting known decisions. But that is what makes sense in consideration of the way CBSA and IRCC, and the IAD, have historically approached factors causing PRs to remain abroad.
OVERALL, FOR the OP:
What will matter most is still, simply, how soon the OP actually comes to Canada to stay. The sooner, the better the OP's chances of (1) simply being waived through at the PIL (Primary Inspection Line), no examination as to RO compliance let alone getting Reported, but also (2) if referred to Secondary at the PoE, the sooner the OP gets here the better the OP's odds of being given a warning about the RO but not Reported, and (3) even if Reported, the sooner the OP gets here the better the odds the Minister's Delegate will decline to issue a Removal Order based on H&C reasons. The OP will get multiple opportunities there, while at the PoE, to give a full explanation for why it has taken so long to get to Canada to stay, which will be considered under the rubric of H&C grounds.
