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

[PMM]

Hi

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:

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.

Thanks for your time to read my message again, I wish the guy who will reply my message have a niceset, good luck new year.

1. Basically ignore the replies you got.
2. If your Aunt (has to be blood relative) has no spouse, no children, and her parents and grandparents are deceased, and she doesn't have a brother/sister/aunt/uncle/niece/nephew in Canada. then she can sponsor 1 relative (plus dependents) in the family class. It doesn't have to be a sister/brother.
3. She would require an Income of approximately $43,492 per year to be eligible.
4. From the Operational Manual OP 02

5.24. Sponsoring one other relative regardless of age or relationship
Sponsors who do not have a living spouse or common-law partner, conjugal partner, a son or daughter, father, mother, grandparent, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, nephew or niece, who is a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident, or any relative or family member who can be sponsored as a member of the family class, may sponsor one relative regardless of age or relationship (anyone connected by blood or adoption).
Sponsors submit information concerning family members and relatives on the Family Information Sheet. If a chosen relative is inadmissible, the sponsor may choose another relative.

 

[sariss]

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.>>

Yes - but a sibling could be sponsored as a member of the family class via the whole "You can sponsor one relative regardless of age or relationship only if..." route.
I'm also interested to know what happens, because it does seem slightly confusing.

 

[PMM]

Hi

Yes - but a sibling could be sponsored as a member of the family class via the whole "You can sponsor one relative regardless of age or relationship only if..." route.
I'm also interested to know what happens, because it does seem slightly confusing.

Read the quote from the manual "anyone connect by blood or adoption" it doesn't say it has to be a sibling.

 

[Avadava]

This is so confusing. The text can actually be interpreted in different ways. I'm looking forward to finding out what the result will be. MandySEP, please get back to us and let us know how things turn out for you. This could set a precedent here on the forum.

 

[wowsers]

PMM You appear to know your way around the literature. Where does the text quoted by MandySEP (which I have read elesewhere also) come from? It is differently worded from the text in OP2 para 5.24 though the effect of it is the same. Incidentally OP 02 para 5.24 does not so far as I can see say anything about having to be in ' Canada', a word which you have highlighted in red. Where do those words come from?

 

[PMM]

Hi

PMM You appear to know your way around the literature. Where does the text quoted by MandySEP (which I have read elesewhere also) come from? It is differently worded from the text in OP2 para 5.24 though the effect of it is the same. Incidentally OP 02 para 5.24 does not so far as I can see say anything about having to be in ' Canada', a word which you have highlighted in red. Where do those words come from?

If the Aunty has a relative that is a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident then she would not be eligible

Here is what the Regulations state

h) a relative of the sponsor, regardless of age, if the sponsor does not have a spouse, a common-law partner, a conjugal partner, a child, a mother or father, a relative who is a child of that mother or father, a relative who is a child of a child of that mother or father, a mother or father of that mother or father or a relative who is a child of the mother or father of that mother or father

(i) who is a Canadian citizen, Indian or permanent resident, or

(ii) whose application to enter and remain in Canada as a permanent resident the sponsor may otherwise sponsor.

The regulations are what governs the application.

 

[screech339]

Hi


If the Aunty has a relative that is a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident then she would not be eligible

Here is what the Regulations state

h) a relative of the sponsor, regardless of age, if the sponsor does not have a spouse, a common-law partner, a conjugal partner, a child, a mother or father, a relative who is a child of that mother or father, a relative who is a child of a child of that mother or father, a mother or father of that mother or father or a relative who is a child of the mother or father of that mother or father

(i) who is a Canadian citizen, Indian or permanent resident, or

(ii) whose application to enter and remain in Canada as a permanent resident the sponsor may otherwise sponsor.

The regulations are what governs the application.

While this is very good information, it still doesn't address the note of "no living clause" in order to qualify for "sponsoring any relative regardless of age".

Please provide this clause in the regulations that allow the aunt to meet conditions of sponsoring any relative.

I would like to be more informed on this part of actual qualification of meeting the special conditions.

Screech339

 

[screech339]

Never mind. It says in the post above "or any family member who can be sponsored in the family class". So it could means that the 60 year old siblings may not actually qualify for family class as they are older than 22 years old. This can mean that since the siblings do not fall under the family class definition, the aunt can in fact sponsor the OP.

Screech339

 

[mandySEP]

Never mind. It says in the post above "or any family member who can be sponsored in the family class". So it could means that the 60 year old siblings may not actually qualify for family class as they are older than 22 years old. This can mean that since the siblings do not fall under the family class definition, the aunt can in fact sponsor the OP.

Screech339

Thanks all of you, all of you r very kind, here below is the information I copied from CIC.

And it mentions that:
(h) a relative of the sponsor, regardless of age, if the sponsor does not have a spouse, a common-law partner, a conjugal partner, a child, a mother or father, a relative who is a child of that mother or father, a relative who is a child of a child of that mother or father, a mother or father of that mother or father or a relative who is a child of the mother or father of that mother or father

(i) who is a Canadian citizen, Indian or permanent resident, or


(ii) whose application to enter and remain in Canada as a permanent resident the sponsor may otherwise sponsor.


This is similar with "PMM" offered to me, here I need to say thank you to "PMM", and the information from him is rather helpful. I will update a letter from a lawyer to your guys to see what it means later, sorry for my poor Chinese English.

 

[wowsers]

It is early morning here in the UK but I start the day somewhat disappointed that this thread appears to be fizzling out without anyone identifying the regulation which allegedly governs the issue. Can no one identify the regulation by name and date, the paragraph number and even better the precise wording of the text so that everyone may read it? Then Screech and I would both of us be able to look up the correct source, come to a more realistic conclusion than a conclusion based on secondary sources and give members the benefit of our informed thoughts on the matter. It is simply not good enough to inform us, as PMM does, that the issue is governed by a regulation. That is obvious (see my first post in this thread). What regulation?

 

[keesio]

I find this rule to be horribly confusing in its current wording. CIC really needs to revise it to make it very simple to understand what exactly they mean.

 

[screech339]

I find this rule to be horribly confusing in its current wording. CIC really needs to revise it to make it very simple to understand what exactly they mean.

I agree with you. It is not so clear cut and dried as it makes out it to be.

 

[PMM]

Hi

It is early morning here in the UK but I start the day somewhat disappointed that this thread appears to be fizzling out without anyone identifying the regulation which allegedly governs the issue. Can no one identify the regulation by name and date, the paragraph number and even better the precise wording of the text so that everyone may read it? Then Screech and I would both of us be able to look up the correct source, come to a more realistic conclusion than a conclusion based on secondary sources and give members the benefit of our informed thoughts on the matter. It is simply not good enough to inform us, as PMM does, that the issue is governed by a regulation. That is obvious (see my first post in this thread). What regulation?

1. Well I posted the wording of the Regulation, you could have then looked it up.
2. But to make it easier for you. http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2002-227/index.html
3. Then you read down to 117. (1)(h)

 

[user828]

So far we've been under the impression that if there is a living family member ANYWHERE in the world, then its not possible, but reality is that they don't have to be in Canada or an app in process

Interesting, wonder if the wrong answers to others might have kept them from inquiring further or dropped the idea

 

[mandySEP]

I have got two letters from different lawyer(one is free charge and one is paid for 65USD ), here below I attached the first one:

Dear XX,

Hello and thank you for your email.

Unfortunately, since your aunt has multiple living siblings, she is not eligible to sponsor you to Canada through the Family Class Sponsorship program.

However, I should explain that there are more than 60 Canadian Immigration programs that are currently in place. In order to assess your eligibility under all of these programs and provide you with your Canadian Immigration options, I will need some more information about your employment and education history.

If you would like me to determine your eligibility under all the current Canadian Immigration programs, please fill out our General eligibility questionnaire at the following link:
xxxxx

You will receive a response within 24 hours.

I look forward to receiving your information.