You are obviously convinced that you are "in the right" here. Why don't you apply for sponsorship and let us know how it works out. It's very clear that this is not the place for judgement to be made and we should allow CIC to decide. Good luck...kabob said:
CIC may not see it as fraud. The problem is they have a strict rule and don't care if it was fraud or a simple misunderstanding of the rules. If you don't declare your common-law partner, child or spouse in your app, they are banned forever under family class. Period. There is no room for interpretation or excuses.kabob said:
She could certainly apply for PR on her own. And she would state in her app that you are her common-law partner, and already a PR. Although in this case CIC would really not care about you, since you are already a PR so have no effect on her own application.
Well, thanks for the information. As far as I now I do not need a visitors Visa to remain in Canada, Just my Passport should be enough to stay here as a Visitor for a max period of 6 moths. however, i might be asked to leave the country for a while and then come back if I want to as a visitor. Not to mention I would not be able to keep my job, unless my company decided to do an LMO for me I guess.Rob_TO said:
You question the level of tolerance on this thread and yet you say judgmental things like this. You judge a common-law relationship as less than a married relationship, essentially saying that those of us who are common-law aren't as committed to our partners just because we haven't said (and don't care to say) a few words to get a piece of paper from the government. Don't be such a hypocrite. You have zero right to define anyone's relationship.saria1 said:
Keep in mind I don't really know if there are any issues or concerns with renouncing your own PR and then applying again but this time with her included. I have never actually seen any cases of this, I'm just suggesting it as a possible option based on my understanding of the general CIC rules. To date i haven't seen any rule that would prevent someone from doing this, but I don't really know for sure how CIC would view the application the 2nd time around, or if they would question exactly why you're doing it.kabob said:
Remember you are not the only one. You are among a few PR who gotten into this mess, however unintentionally. Not only common law partners, spouses, but only their children. There were a few of them landing as PR without declaring their child/children only because they didn't want to delay their PR status any longer or they believed they can sponsor their children after they land. They too have to carry this burden for rest of their lives as well.kabob said:
I totally agree. It would be a big shame if I lose my PR after all. Since we have a chance of getting her PR on her own we will rely on this option as much as we can. What I was mentioning before is if I should fix my mistake of not declaring her as my Common Law partner, because I don't want any trouble or misunderstanding in with CIC in the future.Rob_TO said:
As you mentioned, best to consult with a very very good well versed lawyer. Only he/she can tell you what your options are. If the lawyer tells you that you can sponsor her as common law, I suggest you go look for another lawyer, as I suspect he/she is only interested in getting your money and not after your well being / major problem.kabob said:
This is why CIC insist that the relationship must be a "formal" one. It must be a documented and registered marriage or it must be a common-law partnership that can be proven. The informal agreement to marry by parents is not sufficient. If they were common-law, they would have to have been together for at least 12 continuous months in a "marriage-like" relationship. CIC are fully aware of cultural nuances and make appropriate decisions. The address alone is not sufficient. They must be "intimate partners".handsup said:
What exactly does this mean? That the relation must be consummated? Is kissing enough? So if you are living together with your girlfriend but never had "intimate relations", then you are not common-law? The common-law thing has always confused me. I was led to believe that living at the same address for 1 year with someone you considered a partner was automatic common-lawzardoz said:
Yes that's how it works. If you live with someone as bf/gf for 1 year, you are common-law.keesio said:
