Yes, unfortunately, from personal experience I can tell you that you are NOT eligible under the conjugal partner category I tried to sponsor my husband (then boyfriend) under this category about 3 years ago when we first decided to move back home (me)/immigrate (him). We met the criteria as listed and also had all kinds of proof of an ongoing relationship (matching job offers overseas, visas, ticket stubs, references etc). We were turned down at CIC London for not meeting the criteria - turns out the category is designed either for A) gay couples that can't marry or B) a couple unable to marry because one of them has had a relationship break down in a country where divorce is not allowed and is therefore not able to marry the new partner (because naturally THAT particular scenario happens all the time...)
I don't know if we were more gutted by the delay or ticked right off at the incompetence of a gov't agency that can't even explain its own criteria properly. Anyway, our loss is I suppose your gain - look for a different avenue into Canada but avoid conjugal partner category like the plague!

[QUOTE=turns23]Hello all,my name is Andrew - i just introduced myself on the 'meet and greet'...im currently living in Ottawa, Ontario and work at MBNA Canada(officially 'Bank of America'now)...heres my story:

This is my 4th time in Canada i first came here in 2000 on a rugby tour with my school and loved the place, went all round ontario and knew i wanted to come back.

In 2001 after i finished school i came here on a gap year program with a work visa and worked in Toronto for 5 months in the Eaton Centre in a sports store...had an awesome time and knew that i wanted to move here eventually.

Then in 2004-05 i came to Ottawa on an year long exchange program from Swansea University and i studied at Carleton University - where once again i had an unbelievable time and also met my girlfriend. We done the whole long-distance thing whilst i finished my last year back at Swansea and have now been together for two years (tommorrow is the anniversary!). Now im back out here on a year working/holiday visa but i want to become a permenant resident so i can be with my girlfriend. I have looked into this but seem to fall short in all the requirements to get a permenant residency here - for example i took the 'skilled worker' test on the citizenship and immigration Canada (cic.gc.ca) and fell short as despite having a degree, my work experience is under 1 year in Canada as i have only worked in my current position for about a month. I also looked at applying under the family class section but i do not currently live with my girlfriend as she had to find a place to live before i finished university and is living with a freind....as am i - because of this i am not eligible as a common-law partner (or spouse...for obvious reasons) and am unsure whether i could apply as a 'conjugal' partner???

Basically i am looking for any help/advice/comments that anyone may have which might be able to help me get a permenant residency here...my visa expires august 2007 and am hoping to have a permenant residency by then...is this too optimistic as i've heard waiting times are long to get this processed??

Anyway...apologies for the huge life story


There is another way , you could buy out an existing small business, remote donut shop, hunting cabin. or come via the entrepeneur route , one version is blind invest 150k. You may not have that type of money.

Im not sure, ( I just know someone will correct me) but you used to be able to claim landed status if you went bush for 5 years, and could prove your entry date and means of support at the end of that period.

I don't believe so. The very first step is watching a government video which explains that, once lawyers are involved, the proceedings continue until there are no assets remaining. If one or both parties has an income that could take decades. The video ends with a vignette of a couple, deserted by their lawyers after the funds ran out, incompetently representing themselves in court; that's where we'll end up unless one of us packs Canada in and goes home.

Souvette and I were in an officially recognised common law thingy for several years before her divorce came through.

As were the Newfie and I. That was a surreal breakup, requiring division of assets acquired during a common law relationship despite the claims of a third party on those assets. The Newfie has wisely disappeared as otherwise she'd face a claim, as part of the current litigation, against both her assets from that era and any more recently acquired.

Now we're talking seriously messy. Holy crap!

Oh, yes, if I weren't paying the legal fees for both sides of all of this I'd have a good chuckle at it. I was recently served with a court order for my tax returns for 1987-1989 (not many people could satisfy that one) and a demand for contact information for the woman I lived with in 1990-1991, I had trouble remembering her name, nevermind knowing where she is now.

How can a court demand that you provide information you're only legally required to keep for seven years?

A court order doesn't necessarily come from a court. All that happens is that one side approaches a judge and says "write an order telling the other side to give me this paper" and the judge complies. The person served with the order can object (perhaps saying that the document in question doesn't exist) but that requires going to court (five years and $100,000). One doesn't want to go to court multiple times, because of the time and the money involved, so if it's possible to comply it's easier to do so than to fight.

I've also been served with a demand for tax returns that didn't exist (the firm in question had no obligation to file) and filed retrospectively just to be able to give the copies as required by the court order. What I loved about that was that I turned up with the tax returns and a copy of an audit from a reputable firm ($60,000) saying that there was originally no need to file, the other side produced a letter from an accountant saying that there might have been a need to file but they weren't sure. At that point the judge said he couldn't decide accounting issues so we'd have to go to trial on that point.

Note that each conference at which a lawyer doesn't turn up costs $5,000, each letter reminding the other side that they were to reply to a previous letter costs $200 and you can soon see why my convertible car has been replaced by shared use of a tram.

That Kafka fellow must have lived in Ontario.

Your previous lawyer's suggestion is looking more and more sensible by the minute.

i'm sure one of the other replies will have suggested this, but won't MBNA sponsor you under the PNP scheme ?

There is no PNP for Ontario.

I'll take that as a 'no' then

Why don't you leave, go back to the UK, and get divorced there?

K.

I suspect he's thinking about doing just that.

Pity.