WOM - you may get bounced!

[Msafiri]

Recent WOM driven decision in which the applicant as it turns out revised his physical presence days 4 times from 1134 down to 711. For some reason there always seems to be an 'immigration consultant' behind these types of cases and again the ME features. That WOM may just not only get you your day before the CJ or at the FC but can get you rightly bounced. The real tragedy here is there isn't any mention of legal proceedings against the PR for his total BS on declared residence!

 

[FL1040]

The real tragedy here is there isn't any mention of legal proceedings against the PR for his total BS on declared residence!

I agree

 

[on-hold]

What does WOM mean?

You should post this link on the occasional thread of someone who is determined to apply with fewer than 1095 days, under the impression that it's a neutral dice roll.

(Later edit) -- actually, reading it more closely, it emphasizes that the judge can choose whatever residency test they want, so it would likely not dissuade someone bent on applying without enough physical presence.

 

[Matt the Aussie]

Maybe I'm a bit of a nerd but I really enjoy reading stuff like this.

Key points to take away:

- Applicants must prove residency (in whatever way within the common law the CJ wishes to assess it), or hardship that is beyond potentially waiting longer for citizenship.
- The CJ (and the appeal) both agree that 4 different iterations of the physical residency calculation is highly suspicious and caused the CJ to (rightly) be leery of other information from the applicant.
- The appeal acknowledges there were valid personal reasons for being outside Canada but the applicant failed to prove hardship as above and couldn't prove residency to the CJ's satisfaction.
- Just because the applicant requested the Koo residency criteria does not bind the CJ, nor does the CJ need to justify his/her choice of interpretation of residency.

- Also, CIC should review his RO for PR...not sure if they can though given the Citizenship app has already been rejected and the appeal failed. There is now no action before CIC that would cause his RO to be in question.

 

[Matt the Aussie]

What does WOM mean?
You should post this link on the occasional thread of someone who is determined to apply with fewer than 1095 days, under the impression that it's a neutral dice roll.

(Later edit) -- actually, reading it more closely, it emphasizes that the judge can choose whatever residency test they want, so it would likely not dissuade someone bent on applying without enough physical presence.

WOM = Writ of Mandamus

 

[basharar]

seriously, some people have the nerve to go to court when they are bluntly lying

 

[006007]

What do you mean? The "intent to reside" has already taken effect? If the applicants have already physically resided in Canada for more than 3 years out of 4 years. CJ now requires the proof that "intent to reside" to approve the case?

Maybe I'm a bit of a nerd but I really enjoy reading stuff like this.

Key points to take away:

- Applicants must prove residency (in whatever way within the common law the CJ wishes to assess it), or hardship that is beyond potentially waiting longer for citizenship.
- The CJ (and the appeal) both agree that 4 different iterations of the physical residency calculation is highly suspicious and caused the CJ to (rightly) be leery of other information from the applicant.
- The appeal acknowledges there were valid personal reasons for being outside Canada but the applicant failed to prove hardship as above and couldn't prove residency to the CJ's satisfaction.
- Just because the applicant requested the Koo residency criteria does not bind the CJ, nor does the CJ need to justify his/her choice of interpretation of residency.

- Also, CIC should review his RO for PR...not sure if they can though given the Citizenship app has already been rejected and the appeal failed. There is now no action before CIC that would cause his RO to be in question.

 

[Matt the Aussie]

What do you mean? The "intent to reside" has already taken effect? If the applicants have already physically resided in Canada for more than 3 years out of 4 years. CJ now requires the proof that "intent to reside" to approve the case?

No, I was specifically commenting on the court case at the top of the thread. The case has nothing to do with intent to reside provisions, which by the way have not taken effect yet.