Scared and confused.

[margobear96]

And it's been reported by several others that it is entirely possible to submit an outland app while in Canada without status. Referring you back to our previous thread where we hashed this out http://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/out-of-status-in-canada-urgent-advice-needed-t213091.45.html.

Nowhere does CIC state that a person cannot apply outland while in Canada illegally.

Just my opinion, but until someone who's done a successful outland application while out of status in Canada comes forward to confirm, I wouldn't just take someone's word that it could be done because CIC doesn't explicitly forbid it. I know that's not the legal advice that I got. (CIC also tells you that you can apply for citizenship with less than 1095 days of physical presence, but I have yet to see an example which didn't involve airline pilots or long distance truckers who could never meet the physical presence days by virtue of the nature of their job. Yet there always seem to be people on the board who are adamant that they can apply with a few days short because CIC says you can.... *shrug*) Maybe OP should start a new thread asking for folks who successfully applied outland while out of status in Canada?

 

[LAKEWOOD]

What date do i need to put to the question: Provide the date on which you entered into the common law relationship? is it the date where we first live together or after 1 year of living together?

Thanks

 

[Ponga]

What date do i need to put to the question: Provide the date on which you entered into the common law relationship? is it the date where we first live together or after 1 year of living together?

Thanks

Exactly one year after you started living together.

 

[computergeek]

Nowhere does CIC state that a person cannot apply outland while in Canada illegally.

This is correct: CIC does not explicitly state in any single location that an out-of-status person cannot apply outland. But such clarity is often missing from IRPA, IRPR and the CIC manuals.

What the law says is that someone is not eligible to become a permanent resident of Canada if they are inadmissible. Someone who has violated IRPA (by overstaying) is, by definition, inadmissible. Hence, someone who is inadmissible should have their PR application refused.

Of course, if they don't get caught, the inadmissibility might not be discovered. Arguing that "getting away with" a legal violation is the same as "being allowed to" violate the law is morally bankrupt.

To anyone who has a serious question here: my advice is to speak with an experienced immigration attorney. The opinions of the people in this forum bears little actual value.

 

[Ponga]

Thanks computergeek;I guess I misinterpreted your post here:
http://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/spousal-sponsorship-t46995.0.html;msg3333515#msg3333515

 

[computergeek]

Thanks computergeek;I guess I misinterpreted your post here:
http://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/spousal-sponsorship-t46995.0.html;msg3333515#msg3333515

My post says you must maintain legal status - that is absolutely true and anyone saying that you don't have a legal obligation to remain in status is wrong. The point here is that there is no simple definitive statement from CIC saying this point; rather it is operational and based upon interpretation of law.

Again: we are a forum in which people share their experiences. Anyone trying to rely upon the advice given here is making a serious mistake - we are not lawyers, we do not work for CIC or CBSA and our opinions have no real-world weight. Someone who applies via the Outland process while out of status based upon advice in this forum is the one that would pay the penalty should the advice to do so is wrong.

One of the strengths of the Inland process is that you do not need to be in status to apply. This "benefit" is explained extensively in the CIC manual, but there is no corresponding text that clearly states this is (or is not) the case for Outland. My interpretation of this has been - and remains - that the only reason to mention this benefit is if it is an issue otherwise.

 

[Ponga]

Which would also seem to echo my point:

The maintaining of legal status is not required, per the guide for an In-Canada Spousal sponsorship application, but that same language does not appear anywhere in the guide for an Outland application.

 

[computergeek]

The maintaining of legal status is not required, per the guide for an In-Canada Spousal sponsorship application, but that same language does not appear anywhere in the guide for an Outland application.

I would suggest that in fact the maintaining of legal status is required, per the law for in-Canada spouse/partner. This requirement is relaxed under a public policy that permits this. Previously, one would have to submit an H&C application in such a case. There is no such public policy for outland applicants.

 

[Ponga]

I would suggest that in fact the maintaining of legal status is required, per the law for in-Canada spouse/partner. This requirement is relaxed under a public policy that permits this. Previously, one would have to submit an H&C application in such a case. There is no such public policy for outland applicants.

Yes, but the wording of the following (from the In-Canada Guide) doesn't state that it's a public policy:

Maintaining legal status

Spouses and common‑law partners of Canadian citizens and permanent residents in Canada who wish to apply for permanent resident status are no longer required to have legal immigration status provided that they have an eligible sponsor. All other eligibility requirements continue to apply.

So, I suspect that it only adds to the overall confusion for someone that is applying without status.

 

[computergeek]

Yes, but the wording of the following (from the In-Canada Guide) doesn't state that it's a public policy:

Maintaining legal status

Spouses and common‑law partners of Canadian citizens and permanent residents in Canada who wish to apply for permanent resident status are no longer required to have legal immigration status provided that they have an eligible sponsor. All other eligibility requirements continue to apply.

It's IP 8 (http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/ip/ip08-eng.pdf) that goes into great detail about the public policy.

 

[Ponga]

It's IP 8 (http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/ip/ip08-eng.pdf) that goes into great detail about the public policy.

Yes, I've read it more than once.

The very fact that the public policy is listed in an IP (Inland Processing) manual and NOT in an OP...would only seem to add credibility to the theory that this is only available to an Inland applicant.

Thanks again.

 

[Rob_TO]

Yes, I've read it more than once.

The very fact that the public policy is listed in an IP (Inland Processing) manual and NOT in an OP...would only seem to add credibility to the theory that this is only available to an Inland applicant.

Thanks again.

Should note that when reading through the IP or OP manuals, you'll see each one references the other one occasionally. So they are not meant to be used solely for inland or outland... some aspect of the manuals are interchangeable and instead of writing things twice, they'll just refer to the other manual.

 

[computergeek]

Should note that when reading through the IP or OP manuals, you'll see each one references the other one occasionally. So they are not meant to be used solely for inland or outland... some aspect of the manuals are interchangeable and instead of writing things twice, they'll just refer to the other manual.

Absolutely. It's one of the things that can make analyzing them very complicated.

On the other hand, does the absence of something in one manual mean that it doesn't apply?

 

[SaoirseB]

Hi I'm in a similar situation right now and wondering how the Op got on ?

 

[canuck_in_uk]

Hi I'm in a similar situation right now and wondering how the Op got on ?

OP hasn't been on the forum in nearly a year.

It's fine to apply outland without status. Many people have done this.