MountainHiker

When I applied for Canadian PR I applied with my relationship status as single as I was single I wasn't even seeing anyone. I activated my Canadian PR last year and while I've been filling our taxes I've realized that I was technically common law when I activated it my PR It didn't even cross my mind at the time.

We moved in together in 1st Feb 2013, PR was issued 31st Jan 2014 and I activated PR 12th Feb 2014. So we had been classed as common law for 11 days.

I will probably end up sponsoring my Partner within the next year and I'm thinking that this is going to cause some big problems as I guess it will be classed as misrepresentation on my part.

SchnookoLoly

My understanding based on what others have said is that when the time comes, you'll be found ineligible to sponsor, but you won't lose your own PR.

So what that means is that you won't be able to sponsor your partner through the family class; you not declaring her means that she is permanently excluded because she was not examined under your original application.

So bad news is you can't sponsor her, but good news at least is that I don't think you'll lose your PR... though if I'm mistaken on this then someone will surely step in to correct me.

MountainHiker

Would this include sponsoring as a spouse rather than common law? As if what you say is correct it basically gives me two options leave Canada permanently or lose my Fiancee both not partially great options.

SchnookoLoly

Nope, you can't sponsor her under family class at all.

The reason is that family class applicants are cannot be found inadmissible based on medical results, whereas they can be under other work streams. So if you had declared her when you landed, she'd have been examined at that point as your family member on your own PR application.

But because family class applicants can't be excluded on medical grounds, CIC put in the rule that a family member not declared when the PR lands cannot be sponsored under family class ever - it's meant to stop people from "cheating the system". (So let's say your fiancee would have been excluded for a medical condition if you'd included her on your PR application, without the rule you could get around it by excluding her when you applied for PR and landed, and then sponsor her later when her medical condition couldn't exclude her from Canada. Follow?)

So if she wants to come to Canada, then at this point she'll have to get in on her own merits. If she's 30 or under, then IEC might be an option, but you'll need to be quick getting yourself organised as it's meant to open any day now...

MountainHiker

On second thoughts upon reading the following from Canada immigration website.

One of the main reason we moved in together is she needed a place to live. We had known each other for a couple of months. I added her to the lease on 1st of Feb. Isn't the section in red open to interpretation? If you take it from the date we moved in together It would be a problem. If we take it from a date we decided to be in a "relationship like a marriage". ie. Date we got a join back account or date we got engaged then it would be 3-8 Months after I got PR.

As it's not like we have any evidence we were in a committed relationship when I activated my PR, we just have a lease and that I had known her for 3 months. I mean if we wait till we are married we don't even need to have been living together so I don't need to even include the lease in the application.

SchnookoLoly

First of all, lying on your application WILL lose you your PR, so I am not going to even entertain anything in your post about trying to pass off the truth as something else to make your circumstances more favourable.

However, if you first moved in together as roommates and didn't start dating (boyfriend/girlfriend) until after that and you happened to be living together, then that's different.

Roommates who have been living together do NOT count as common-law partners.

However, if she was your girlfriend when she moved in with you, then she is your common-law partner.

So the dates that matter here: 1, when did she become your girlfriend (you to confirm), and 2, the date you moved in together, 1 Feb 2013.

So when did you start dating?

MountainHiker

It wouldn't be lying I'm just trying to lock down the definitions correctly as from what I've read in the last 2 hours it's not a strait answer. In my first post I was worried because of the date we moved in together and the definitions of common law because this one date makes a huge difference to us.

We met sometime in November 2012, Started seeing each other mid Jan 2013, We moved in together on 1st Feb 2013 the main reason we moved in is she needed a place to live. We weren't in anything like a marriage like relationship at that point, we did separate things we had separate rooms I even went on holiday without her but we were still dating.

It wasn't until much later sometime in the 3-8 months range that I would consider us together but putting a date on that would be difficult we got a joint bank account for rent and groceries 3-4 months after we moved in we got engaged 8 months after she moved in.

This is that I mean about the part I highlighted in red who decides when we became common law. Is it when we moved in, joint bank account, or engagement?

SchnookoLoly

Ugh.... honestly, it's kind of a grey area. I'm hoping some others will weigh in on this.

THe fact that you were dating when you started living together means CIC may view the date you started living together as 1 Feb 2013... but I sort of see your point that it's perhaps just because of convenience and you'd only JUST started dating.

Honestly, I don't know. It feels a bit like you're arguing semantics, and yet I can still see your point.

Would love to have a few others weigh in on this one... Jim? Oompa? Siouxie? Help!

MountainHiker

Sorry if I seem abrasive I don't mean to come across that way and I am very thankful for your help. It's hard to put across my point as its very confusing and like you say it seems like a grey area. There isn't a very clear definition of common law.

What does the Government of Canada consider to be a common-law relationship? says:

This is the main bit I'm currently focused on as if we are still dating not known each other for a long period to me it couldn't be considered a marriage like relationship but I'm sure people have been in the same situation as me but trying to get it seen the opposite.

Also at the end of the day if my Fiancee won't be able to stay I won't be either so we might just put in the application and see what happens.

SchnookoLoly

I know you don't seem to be abrasive - it's frustrating and I understand you're in a tough position.

However, you were dating, and you moved in together. You weren't just roommates who moved in, you were dating, and you moved in together. You may not have been in a "marriage-like relationship" off the bat... but if we were arguing this the other way, I'm sure you'd not hesitate to say that you have been living together since 1 Feb 2013, no?

I'll bet there are people who move in together who aren't necessarily doing the whole "marriage-like relationship" thing straight off the bat. When I moved in with my then-bf-now-husband, we'd been together just over a year (decided at about 10 months to move in). He was on the lease since my previous flatmate was moving out, but we didn't have any of the other stuff on the list - we sort of just didn't bother. Once we started talking about moving to Canada we started getting our paper trail in order - joint account, joint utilities, and all the rest of that. We also weren't 100% sure of a "marriage-like relationship" until we'd been living together for awhile and knew we were in it for the long haul... hence I think you're kind of arguing semantics on this one.

The only difference is that you were only JUST together when she moved in, and you say it was just out of necessity... I don't know. It's a gray area.

I think it will be useful for a few others to weigh in on this one, as I'm really not sure. You could probably make an argument either way... need more opinions.

(Sorry if this got rambly - I'm kind of just typing a conscious stream of thought because I really am stumped.)

Ontheroadoflife

I'm with the above poster...I'm not for one minute suggesting she moved in to a rented room she found out about from a mutual friend and a relationship developed owing to getting to know each other...<koff>

And I'm not for one minute suggesting you tell CiC that, it would be extremely silly to lie to CIC about something that only you guys could prove or dissprove, and one of you drop the other in it.

All i will say is...i have a close friend, who is a Canadian, who married another countries national, they have been married for over 7 years...and she still cannot even enter Canada on a Visitor Visa....as someone in CIC raised a red flag when they initially applied and that was the reason for refusal, this persons thoughts and feelings on their relationship and it's bona fides, and that red flag still exists and causes problems, through judicial reviews etc.

It's an area you tread very carefully in.

Aviator

From the described timeline, you had moved into the same house, had a joint lease and opened joint bank accounts, all before you had received and activated your PR. This to an outsider looks like a marriage like relationship that should have been disclosed. I am not seeing it as grey at all.

Cannot see any relevance to being 'engaged' or not to the situation. This is just a decision to formalise a relationship to marriage rather than marriage like.

I believe you already know the answer to this question.

My opinion, you are SOL on the sponsorship element and your girlfriend will need to find a job and get PR on her own merits.

Talking to an immigration lawyer might be a wise investment under the circumstances. If they tell you you are OK, at least you can demonstrate you did your due diligence.

Ontheroadoflife

Maybe it would be an idea to invest $200 or so and speak for an hour to a professional in a case such as this, rather than worrying for days, this person knows what they are talking about, after all of us here are laypersons after all!

Siouxie

You may want to read the manual as it explains what the basis is. http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resourc...p/op02-eng.pdf

paw339

I went to a wedding recently where the bride and groom moved in together as friends and for 6 months nothing happened, then after one late night party everything changed....... The only ones surprised about the change in their relationship were themselves as everyone else couldn't believe it took so long as they had always liked each other. They certainly weren't common law initially even though they lived together.