Help!!! Can my Aunty sponsor me to Canada?

[sariss]

It's worded tricky.

It says "You can sponsor one relative regardless of age or relationship only if you do not have a living spouse or common-law partner, conjugal partner, a son or daughter, parent, grandparent, sibling, uncle, aunt, nephew or niece who could be sponsored as a member of the family class, and you do not have any relative who is a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident or registered as an Indian under the Indian Act."

It mentions siblings, but says them in the context of being able to sponsor them. Adult siblings cannot be sponsored ("Who cannot be sponsored
Other relatives, such as brothers and sisters over 18, or adult independent children cannot be sponsored. However, if they apply to immigrate under the Skilled Worker Class, they may get extra points for adaptability for having a relative in Canada.")

Which makes it seem like you would be able to be sponsored. BUT because you can sponsor ONE relative regardless of age, etc - then I think siblings would have priority. Because she has siblings in China that she COULD sponsor as that ONE family member, then you would not be eligible.

That's what I get out of it. For example you generally cannot sponsor nieces of nephews, but they are mentioned in the wording of the first part. I think basically someone needs to only have ONE family member left in order to sponsor them this way. I think...

 

[screech339]

The way it is worded to me is this based on OP's questions according the sponsorship rules.

His aunt is alone in Canada, no living relative in Canada. She has living siblings living in China.

If she was able to sponsor, she can only sponsor her siblings and probably only one of them. Once her siblings are passed away, only then can she sponsor anyone regardless of age, relationship. The issue is that she can sponsor only one, if I'm not mistaken. So I don't think she can even sponsor the OP as he is not single and has dependents which means more than one sponsor. Thus makes the OP ineligible to be sponsored by his aunt, even if she was able to.

Screech339

 

[user828]

OP also says aunty sponsored him, now howz that possible?

 

[Avadava]

OP also says aunty sponsored him, now howz that possible?

I think what he means by that, is that they filed the application. It doesn't necessarily mean that the aunt has been approved to sponsor.

 

[screech339]

OP also says aunty sponsored him, now howz that possible?

I think he meant that he is the one being sponsored and his aunt is the sponsor. His english is not the best. But you can see in the OP original post asking if his aunt can sponsor him and his family under the special conditions. And don't think they actually filed the application. He is merely asking if his aunt can be the sponsor for himself and his family.

Screech339

 

[Avadava]

Thanks both of you, please see the below policy, it seems that if the brothers and sisters are over 18 years old, my aunty can not sponsor them, please view, I am very confused about this as well, my application has been sent and I just wish for the best now:

The application has been sent according to a previous post.

 

[screech339]

The application has been sent according to a previous post.

I missed that post. Well in my opinion, I think the application will be rejected on account that his aunt has living siblings.

Screech339

 

[Avadava]

I missed that post. Well in my opinion, I think the application will be rejected on account that his aunt has living siblings.

Screech339

Unfortunately for the OP, I agree with you.

 

[mandySEP]

Unfortunately for the OP, I agree with you.

Thanks for all your concern, you r all very kind. Here below is some information I got from CIC and now I copy it here, I will tell the finial decision to all of you no matter it is good or bad:

Who may use this application package?

This application is for persons who wish to be re-united with close family members in Canada. In order to use this application package, you must, with respect to the sponsor, be
•his or her father or mother,
•his or her grandfather or grandmother,
•a child he or she adopted outside Canada or intends to adopt in Canada,
•his or her brother, sister, nephew, niece, grandson or granddaughter, and be an orphan, under the age of 18 and not a spouse or common-law partner,
•his or her relative, regardless of your age, if the sponsor does not have a spouse, common-law partner, conjugal partner, son, daughter, mother, father, brother, sister, grandfather, grandmother, uncle, aunt, nephew or niece, who is a Canadian citizen, Indian or permanent resident or whose application for permanent residence in Canada he or she could sponsor.

 

[scylla]

Yes - we're all familiar with these rules.

What everyone is telling you is that you don't qualify to be sponsored because your aunt has siblings who are still alive and can be sponsored instead of you.

 

[mandySEP]

Yes - we're all familiar with these rules.

What everyone is telling you is that you don't qualify to be sponsored because your aunt has siblings who are still alive and can be sponsored instead of you.

I know, thank you. I said I would tell all of you the final result from CIC for the immigration had been posted ;D

 

[wowsers]

quote author=mandySEP link=topic=180453.msg2819616#msg2819616 date=1389177311]
Hello Guys, I am sorry for your precious time to read my message, my status is as below: I am from China and I am 36 years old, I got married and have a 5 years old daughter. My aunty's status is as below: her husband, parents and grandparents passed away, there is no relative in Canada with her, and she has no children. Her income per year is about 43,000CAD. Can she sponsor me to Canada? She is very longly now and she has no one relative in Canada, but she has brothers and sisters who are over 60 years old in China. I just want to know whether she is eligible to sponsor me to Canada. As I have seen some immigration policy as below:
[/quote]

I preface this analysis by admitting that I have not found the Act or Regulation on which MandySEP relies and am simply analyzing the text quoted by Mandy SEP and others who have contributed to this thread. On the assumption that that text represents the law on the matter I am of the opinion that Mandy SEP can be sponsored by his/her aunt. To answer MandySEP's question one has to tackle the text step by step, asking the correct questions arising at each step. Start with the second paragraph. The question which arises from that paragraph is whether MandySEP is a relative of any age of his/her aunt. The answer to that is clearly yes: MandySEP is a nephew or niece of his/her aunt and his/her age is known (36) but immaterial.(because the person to be sponsored can be of any age) However you then have to turn to the note at the end of the text. The aunt can, so far as material to the facts set out in MandySEP's post, only sponsor one relative (but see the third paragraph). Moreover the aunt cannot sponsor MandySEP if the aunt has a sibling who could be sponsored as a member of the family class. So the question arising from the note is whether the aunt could sponsor either of her 60+ old siblings as members of the family class. The answer to that is no: she cannot sponsor either of them them because they fall outside the ambit of the first paragraph of the regulation: they are 60+ and therefore not under 18 years. The exclusion in the Note at the end of the text is therefore inapplicable, from which it follows that the aunt can sponsor MandySEP. The only remaining question then is whether the aunt can sponsor MandySEP's child. If that child is dependent on MandySEP the child falls under paragraph 3 of the text and can be sponsored as a dependent child. If MandyMEP has a spouse the same principle applies: he/she can be sponsored as an accompanying relative. I hate disagreeing with so many members of the forum! So if you think my analysis is wrong tell me why it is wrong!

 

[screech339]

quote author=mandySEP link=topic=180453.msg2819616#msg2819616 date=1389177311]
Hello Guys, I am sorry for your precious time to read my message, my status is as below: I am from China and I am 36 years old, I got married and have a 5 years old daughter. My aunty's status is as below: her husband, parents and grandparents passed away, there is no relative in Canada with her, and she has no children. Her income per year is about 43,000CAD. Can she sponsor me to Canada? She is very longly now and she has no one relative in Canada, but she has brothers and sisters who are over 60 years old in China. I just want to know whether she is eligible to sponsor me to Canada. As I have seen some immigration policy as below:


I preface this analysis by admitting that I have not found the Act or Regulation on which MandySEP relies and am simply analyzing the text quoted by Mandy SEP and others who have contributed to this thread. On the assumption that that text represents the law on the matter I am of the opinion that Mandy SEP can be sponsored by his/her aunt. To answer MandySEP's question one has to tackle the text step by step, asking the correct questions arising at each step. Start with the second paragraph. The question which arises from that paragraph is whether MandySEP is a relative of any age of his/her aunt. The answer to that is clearly yes: MandySEP is a nephew or niece of his/her aunt and his/her age is known (36) but immaterial.(because the person to be sponsored can be of any age) However you then have to turn to the note at the end of the text. The aunt can, so far as material to the facts set out in MandySEP's post, only sponsor one relative (but see the third paragraph). Moreover the aunt cannot sponsor MandySEP if the aunt has a sibling who could be sponsored as a member of the family class. So the question arising from the note is whether the aunt could sponsor either of her 60+ old siblings as members of the family class. The answer to that is no: she cannot sponsor either of them them because they fall outside the ambit of the first paragraph of the regulation: they are 60+ and therefore not under 18 years. The exclusion in the Note at the end of the text is therefore inapplicable, from which it follows that the aunt can sponsor MandySEP. The only remaining question then is whether the aunt can sponsor MandySEP's child. If that child is dependent on MandySEP the child falls under paragraph 3 of the text and can be sponsored as a dependent child. If MandyMEP has a spouse the same principle applies: he/she can be sponsored as an accompanying relative. I hate disagreeing with so many members of the forum! So if you think my analysis is wrong tell me why it is wrong!

Which part of this note are you not understanding:

Note: You can sponsor one relative regardless of age or relationship only if you do not have a living spouse or common-law partner, conjugal partner, a son or daughter, parent, grandparent, sibling, uncle, aunt, nephew or niece who could be sponsored as a member of the family class, and you do not have any relative who is a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident or registered as an Indian under the Indian Act.

His aunt has living siblings in China. Thus OP is not eligible to be sponsored by his aunt. If anyone is eligible to be sponsored by his aunt, it would be her siblings as they takes precedent over OP, and only one I would suspect. So if OP was able to be sponsored by aunt, assuming aunt has no living siblings, the issue then become, can OP take his family. The condition says, can sponsor one (1) relative, not one (1) family.

Also note the order of precedent, spouse/partner, son or daughter, parent, grandparents, then siblings , then uncles, aunt then nephew/niece which OP falls under. So the aunt's siblings goes first in sponsorship qualification before OP as nephew. So until all OP's aunt's living siblings all pass away, will OP even be considered.

 

[wowsers]

Which part of this note are you not understanding:

Note: You can sponsor one relative regardless of age or relationship only if you do not have a living spouse or common-law partner, conjugal partner, a son or daughter, parent, grandparent, sibling, uncle, aunt, nephew or niece who could be sponsored as a member of the family class, and you do not have any relative who is a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident or registered as an Indian under the Indian Act.

His aunt has living siblings in China. Thus OP is not eligible to be sponsored by his aunt. If anyone is eligible to be sponsored by his aunt, it would be her siblings as they takes precedent over OP, and only one I would suspect. So if OP was able to be sponsored by aunt, assuming aunt has no living siblings, the issue then become, can OP take his family. The condition says, can sponsor one (1) relative, not one (1) family.

Also note the order of precedent, spouse/partner, son or daughter, parent, grandparents, then siblings , then uncles, aunt then nephew/niece which OP falls under. So the aunt's siblings goes first in sponsorship qualification before OP as nephew. So until all OP's aunt's living siblings all pass away, will OP even be considered.

You ignore the words <<who could be sponsored as a member of the family class>> It is common ground that the 60+ year old siblings are living. They are however not persons <<who could be sponsored as a member of the family class>> unless of course you construe that part of the text as meaning <<which anyone could sponsor as a member of the family class.>> If you construed the text in that way you would have to invent all kinds of scenarios eg that they had Canadian spouses who could sponsor them. That is clearly a nonsensical construction of the text. It means <<who could be sponsored by the sponsor in question [the aunt] as a member of the family class>>. The aunt cannot sponsor her siblings,because they are 60+ years old, and so she is not disqualified from sponsoring MandySEP. There is no order of precedence: that is a product of an over-fertile imagination. There is simply a list of relatives who might if they could be sponsored disqualify MandySEP from being sponsored. None of them disqualify MandySEP because none of them could be sponsored. So what part of the text do you not understand?

 

[screech339]

I still stand by my interpretation of the wording of the condition of sponsoring a relative outside family requirements.

We will find out from OP's future posting to confirm my and probably everyone else and yours to see who is right.

Screech339