Hi all.. I have received my PR in 2010 and I supposed to stay in my native place for 3 years because of the immediate death of my mom. Actually, I have stayed here only for 1 year 3 months after getting the PR. Recently, I have got the departure order. I don't know what to do. I need your help. Please suggest some ways to move against this.
PR obligation.. Advice please...
- Thread starter carmon
- Start date
More information is needed. Where are you now? Outside of Canada or inside of Canada? What triggered the departure order? Did you apply for PR without meeting the residency requirement? Were you reported for failing to meet RO when entering Canada? Something else? Provide any many details as you can.
Hi.. I am now here in Canada. The IO reported me that I didn't meet the PR requirements and I have to face the departure. I came to know that we can go for an appeal in such situations. I would like to know that, is it possible to get the PR status back if we go for an appeal?
The issuance of a Departure Order or Removal Order does not immediately terminate your PR status. If you make an appeal on time, you keep PR status pending the outcome of the appeal. I have seen appeals take between one and three years. If you win the appeal, you keep PR status. If you lose the appeal, the Departure Order becomes enforceable and your PR status is lost.
If you do not make an appeal on time, the Departure Order will become enforceable the day after the time for making an appeal. You have PR status until that date, but then (again if you do not make an appeal) the Departure Order becomes enforceable and your PR status is lost.
Since you are in breach of the PR Residency Obligation, your only chance to make a successful appeal would be to show you have sufficient H&C reasons for IRCC to allow you to retain PR status. The amount of time in Canada is an important element. But so is the reason for the absence. So is consideration of whether you returned to Canada as soon as reasonably possible. What you describe is no where near enough to offer any guess about the chances you have of winning the appeal.
Probably best to at least consult with a reputable, experienced immigration lawyer.
But to have any chance of success, you need to make the appeal ON TIME.
If you do not make an appeal on time, the Departure Order will become enforceable the day after the time for making an appeal. You have PR status until that date, but then (again if you do not make an appeal) the Departure Order becomes enforceable and your PR status is lost.
Since you are in breach of the PR Residency Obligation, your only chance to make a successful appeal would be to show you have sufficient H&C reasons for IRCC to allow you to retain PR status. The amount of time in Canada is an important element. But so is the reason for the absence. So is consideration of whether you returned to Canada as soon as reasonably possible. What you describe is no where near enough to offer any guess about the chances you have of winning the appeal.
Probably best to at least consult with a reputable, experienced immigration lawyer.
But to have any chance of success, you need to make the appeal ON TIME.
@dpenabill
You said "I have seen appeals take between one and three years." May I ask, please, in the case of the example of appeal taking three years, do you know it personally or what you have read about on this forum? If it is the former, would you by any chance know which IAD office was dealing (or dealt) with the matter out of Vancouver, Toronto or Montreal?
You said "I have seen appeals take between one and three years." May I ask, please, in the case of the example of appeal taking three years, do you know it personally or what you have read about on this forum? If it is the former, would you by any chance know which IAD office was dealing (or dealt) with the matter out of Vancouver, Toronto or Montreal?
You will need to elaborate what you mean by "personal issues" if you want any feedback on your chances.carmon said:
Usually H&C reasons are accepted for extreme medical conditions (like caring for a sick parent) that can explain the full absence from Canada.
Reasons where you had a personal choice in the matter (such as staying outside Canada for employment or school) are usually denied as H&C reasons.
Good idea (albeit I do not know anything in particular about this lawyer, or much about most others either).carmon said:
Drafted before your last post:
To be clear, the appeal of a Removal Order, or Departure Order, which was issued following a 44(1) inadmissibility report for breach of the PR Residency Obligation, goes to the IAD (Appellate Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada), which is an administrative appeal, a sort of quasi-judicial procedure.carmon said:
Yes, the IAD MUST CONSIDER any reasons the PR submits in assessing whether there are sufficient H&C reasons for allowing the PR to retain PR status. But how much positive weight the reasons might have varies greatly . . . even the very same circumstance can have a very different influence depending on other factors in the respective individuals' situations.
While perhaps some very general ballpark (a very big ballpark) assessments might be offered by some in this forum, relative to particular circumstances, no one here can offer anywhere near a reliable opinion about how this or that factor will influence the H&C determination by the IAD.
For example, yes it is relatively safe to say that reasons for being abroad depending on personal choices will not generally help much and could be negative factors, even if fairly compelling (like staying at a job that pays twice as much as one could earn in Canada), but that is a very general observation and might totally miss the mark depending on other circumstances in the individual's situation.
Overall, be very skeptical if not outright dismissive of any declarative advice offered in this forum. Lots of good information, informative and insightful anecdotal experiences, and suggestions as to what information and factors to consider, can be found here. But not reliable advice.
My advice: generally avoid relying on advice given here. And yes, this is advice, and thus it is inherently self-contradictory . . . there are almost always exceptions, and sure some advice is simple, and straight-forward enough, to be reliable on its face. Such as advice to follow the instructions, advice to avoid making misrepresentations, advice meet the PR RO before applying to renew a PR card, and so on.
Best to consult a reputable immigration lawyer about strength of H&C reasons.
I am talking about a paid-for consultation, in which a lawyer looks at the specifics of your situation before offering an opinion. Many immigration lawyers can be hired for just a consultation, precisely for the purpose of assessing the strengths and weaknesses in one's situation. It is best if the individual does as much homework about their situation before going to the lawyer, so that the consultation can be focused on real information about the individual's situation rather than a general explanation of the process and issues. At $300 an hour, that is a bit high priced for mere instruction in general information.
Your most recent post indicates you intend to go to a lawyer, and again, from my perspective obviously, good idea.
No.axelfoley said:
One can go to IAD decisions in CanLII http://www.canlii.org/en/ca/irb/ and compose a search to find residency obligation cases (most, however, will be the appeal of a PR TD denial) and look for information related to location.
Note, however, I highly doubt that efforts to manipulate which region or local office is involved, that is forum shopping, would be of much benefit. So far as I can discern, the outcome and time lines are far more often dependent on the particulars of the individual case than on which office is involved.
Regarding time appeal may take, just as an example, a recent appeal took four years plus: see the very recent decision regarding Elie Farid Aoun, which is reported at http://canlii.ca/t/grph4
In this case, the Departure Order was made December 23, 2011 but the IAD hearing did not take place until October 2015, nearly four years later, and it was over four years before the decision on appeal.
It is not clear whether the Departure Order arose from a PoE examination or in the course of an application for a new PR card, but given the date and this PR's pattern of visiting his family in Canada over the holidays, it seems likely this was a case arising from a PoE examination.
In this case, the Departure Order was made December 23, 2011 but the IAD hearing did not take place until October 2015, nearly four years later, and it was over four years before the decision on appeal.
It is not clear whether the Departure Order arose from a PoE examination or in the course of an application for a new PR card, but given the date and this PR's pattern of visiting his family in Canada over the holidays, it seems likely this was a case arising from a PoE examination.
For another point of reference in what suffices, in terms of H&C reasons, to retain PR status, see the recent decision regarding Kheloudja Dahlab at http://canlii.ca/t/grphb
One of the most common reasons cited, for long delays in returning to Canada, is the illness of a parent. This case illustrates that a parent's illness is not a blank cheque; this former PR lost the appeal, thus losing PR status. A paragraph from the case illustrates:
"[13] Basically, the appellant testified that she did not comply with the residency obligation because she had to look after her father whose condition had deteriorated in 2007. He died on October 10, 2011, more than five months before she returned to Canada on May 13, 2012. The panel notes that the appellant’s father was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease in 2000[9] so she knew when she was landed that he was going to have problems and by August 4, 2007,[10] she had left Canada never to return until March 13, 2012. She may have had a moral obligation to take care of her father but the appellant also had a legal obligation to be physically present in Canada for a relatively short period, namely, 730 days during a five-year period. The panel also notes that during the period of her father’s illness, the appellant’s sister Fazia was also living at home. As mentioned above, she only got married in December 2012, after the death of their father."
Time line: four+ years from date of Departure Order to date of hearing.
Not explicitly stated, but obviously a case where the Departure Order was issued after a PoE examination.
Note that despite the minimal amount of time this individual spent in Canada, which is a very negative factor, the IAD nonetheless also considered the PR's time in Canada after the issuance of the Departure Order, albeit this also became a negative factor given here too this PR was abroad most of the time while waiting for the appeal hearing.
One of the most common reasons cited, for long delays in returning to Canada, is the illness of a parent. This case illustrates that a parent's illness is not a blank cheque; this former PR lost the appeal, thus losing PR status. A paragraph from the case illustrates:
"[13] Basically, the appellant testified that she did not comply with the residency obligation because she had to look after her father whose condition had deteriorated in 2007. He died on October 10, 2011, more than five months before she returned to Canada on May 13, 2012. The panel notes that the appellant’s father was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s disease in 2000[9] so she knew when she was landed that he was going to have problems and by August 4, 2007,[10] she had left Canada never to return until March 13, 2012. She may have had a moral obligation to take care of her father but the appellant also had a legal obligation to be physically present in Canada for a relatively short period, namely, 730 days during a five-year period. The panel also notes that during the period of her father’s illness, the appellant’s sister Fazia was also living at home. As mentioned above, she only got married in December 2012, after the death of their father."
Time line: four+ years from date of Departure Order to date of hearing.
Not explicitly stated, but obviously a case where the Departure Order was issued after a PoE examination.
Note that despite the minimal amount of time this individual spent in Canada, which is a very negative factor, the IAD nonetheless also considered the PR's time in Canada after the issuance of the Departure Order, albeit this also became a negative factor given here too this PR was abroad most of the time while waiting for the appeal hearing.
@dpenabill thank you for the link to this specific appeal of "Removal Order" and timeline to reach the hearing date at IAD. I had missed this one, but it is definitely instructive. Thank you once again for your incisive and pertinent reply!dpenabill said:
@dpenabill Second link also very instructive & helpful!
I had not seen that one either. I will be able to better focus my search for relevant cases based on these two examples. I think others in a similar position could benefit from reading this case also.
I had not seen that one either. I will be able to better focus my search for relevant cases based on these two examples. I think others in a similar position could benefit from reading this case also.