Canada Immigration and Visa Discussion Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Canada Immigration Topics > Canadian Citizenship
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Bill C24 and a risk worthy to take?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Bill C24 and a risk worthy to take?
 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
noahattic View Drop Down
New Member
New Member


Joined: 10 Mar 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 4 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote noahattic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Bill C24 and a risk worthy to take?
    Posted: 10 Mar 2015 at 10:03pm
Hi everyone, 

I have been reading many news and posts regarding to the new Bill C24 since it does make a great impact on my life. I sincerely hope to borrow the extensive knowledge and experiences of this forum to help make one of the biggest decisions of my life.

Allow me to introduce my background first. Back the days, I came to Canada on Sep, 2006 as a student, then graduated from school and have been working till now. In May, 2013, I became a PR. During the recent two years, I have traveled a lot, both work and vacation related.  As result, I still fall short of approximately 80 days to meet the 1095 days of physical presence after the 2 year anniversary. 

According to the new law, the Pre-PR time will not be credited, even I have spent almost 9 years in this country, and am very well intended to live here for the lifetime. This new bill will make me wait till at least late 2017 to be qualified since I will certainly need to travel abroad in the next 2 years. In addition, the processing time can be very unpredictable by that time as well, which means I may not become a true Canadian until 2019. 

I was hoping the government would at least value the time that many of us have spent here before becoming the PR. This is the part of the new law that saddens me the most. Not to mention the new citizenship law de-values the citizens who carry the foreign background, in a way.

I would say the new bill will most likely take effective by the beginning of July. Given the fact that I will be eligible to apply the citizenship by this May, even I do not have the full 1095 days in the pocket, my questions is -  is it worthy to take the risk and apply anyways? What are the chances to get approved by the judge? How troublesome the KOO test, the questionnaires or any other things required can be??? 

I am just so close to be fully eligible. It's really hard to not take the chance and wait another 2 or 3 years.  I am not very familiar with how the judge and government work regarding to these shortfall cases. Any advises would certainly help and be appreciated. 

Thanks, 


Edited by noahattic - 10 Mar 2015 at 10:15pm
Back to Top
noahattic View Drop Down
New Member
New Member


Joined: 10 Mar 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 4 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote noahattic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Mar 2015 at 12:05am
I am looking at whether or not the KOO, RQ, Court time, processing fees or any kind of hassles can offset the 2 or 3 year of waiting.  Can I say this, if applying now and later will most likely result in the same timeline of 3 years, I have nothing to lose? Perhaps, there might be a slim chance? 

I read that "Failed applicants may re-apply again when their circumstances regarding physical presence are more favorable during a reference period." What would be the negative impact if an applicant gets denied?


Edited by noahattic - 11 Mar 2015 at 12:07am
Back to Top
dpenabill View Drop Down
Top Member
Top Member


Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 6407 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote dpenabill Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Mar 2015 at 12:54am

Technically shortfall applications (those with less than 1095 days of actual physical presence) may still be approved resulting in the grant of citizenship.

We do not know, not by a long shot, the extent to which this continues to happen. We do know that there are many indications this is more and more, however often it happens, an exception. We know for example that many applicants who fell short of the 1095 day APP threshold by not very much have been denied.

There are many who feel there is very little hope that such applications will succeed. Some are emphatic there is virtually no chance of succeeding.

But the problem for someone in your position is even greater in that you would not only have a shortfall application, but an application relying on credit for presence in Canada prior to becoming a PR. My sense is this (the combination of a shortfall and reliance on pre-landing credit) was always a very tough case to make, even before the trend at CIC and among CJs toward applying the strict APP test.

I have seen one case in which a Citizenship Judge approved a shortfall applicant who was relying on pre-landing time in Canada for credit toward the residency requirement. But CIC appealed and the appeal was granted. I do not know what happened in that case when it was reconsidered by another CJ.

The filing fee is only a matter of hundreds of dollars, and perhaps that is of little import to you. But, frankly, that money probably could be better spent elsewhere.

Note: there are probably many thousands of PRs in a similar situation to yours. Many will elect to apply based on a shortfall. The odds are that very few will succeed. And of course this is spurred by the impending coming into force date for the revised residency requirements in Bill C-24.
Bureaucracy is what bureaucracy does, or When in doubt, follow the instructions. Otherwise, follow the instructions.



BTW: Not an expert, not a Can. lawyer, never worked in immigration
Back to Top
noahattic View Drop Down
New Member
New Member


Joined: 10 Mar 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 4 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote noahattic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Mar 2015 at 12:23pm
Hi Dpenabill,

Appreciate your input. I have read a lot of your posts yesterday, they have been helpful. 

I guess, under the current direction the CIC and CJ is heading, my case will most likely be denied, which can be a waste of time and energy.  Sigh... my mind is leaning towards not making the call then.

I am wondering the success rate of a shortfall application that replies on Pre-PR time before the new bill was introduced? If it was pretty tough already, then it should help me complete kill the idea of applying ahead. 

I can surely tell that many shortfall applicants like me will make the last minute call, which will make things worse. 

BTW, the definition of APP test is the actual physical presence of 4 years in Canada prior to the case submitted, with the calculation that Pre-PR time counts as a full? am I understanding it correctly?? Based on such, I might pass the test.  
< id="tmp_downloadhelper_" style="display: none;">
Back to Top
Harrikon View Drop Down
Junior Member
Junior Member


Joined: 04 Feb 2015
Status: Offline
Points: 103 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Harrikon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Mar 2015 at 3:26pm
Originally posted by noahattic noahattic wrote:

Hi Dpenabill,

Appreciate your input. I have read a lot of your posts yesterday, they have been helpful. 

I guess, under the current direction the CIC and CJ is heading, my case will most likely be denied, which can be a waste of time and energy.  Sigh... my mind is leaning towards not making the call then.

I am wondering the success rate of a shortfall application that replies on Pre-PR time before the new bill was introduced? If it was pretty tough already, then it should help me complete kill the idea of applying ahead. 

I can surely tell that many shortfall applicants like me will make the last minute call, which will make things worse. 

BTW, the definition of APP test is the actual physical presence of 4 years in Canada prior to the case submitted, with the calculation that Pre-PR time counts as a full? am I understanding it correctly?? Based on such, I might pass the test.  
< id="tmp_downloadhelper_" style="display: none;">

Better be safe than sorry! Waiting is of course better! Your travel options might be limited and so will your voting rights, but the next federal election is not until 2020. SO you do not need to worry!
Applied: June 2012
Processing: December 2012
RQ and Test: December 2013
(Reason for RQ: unknown)
Oath: May 2015
Back to Top
dpenabill View Drop Down
Top Member
Top Member


Joined: 29 Nov 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 6407 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote dpenabill Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Mar 2015 at 5:47pm

I could post a detailed description of why I think there is so little hope for a shortfall application relying on pre-landing credits, but ultimately I do not really know how every CJ will decide such a case. I think my opinion about this is fairly well-informed and derived from a thoughtful analysis, but there is no case history I know of which addresses this situation . . . beyond the one case last year, in a published Federal Court decision, where a CJ actually did approve such an applicant, but the Federal Court granted CIC's appeal (as I recall, the Federal Court hung its reasoning for granting the appeal on technical grounds having to do with the CJ's purported failure to adequately explain his or her reasoning for granting approval, so that decision did not explicitly state that no such applicant should be granted citizenship; but it was easy enough to read between the lines and recognize that either it was the shortfall itself (which was not very large as I recall) or the combination, that fueled the outcome).

I do think, to be clear, that the absence of any history regarding such applications suggests that even back when shortfall applications in general had far, far better odds than they have now, few if any prospective applicants thought it would be worth making an application in this situation, a shortfall application relying on credit for pre-landing days spent in Canada.

Bureaucracy is what bureaucracy does, or When in doubt, follow the instructions. Otherwise, follow the instructions.



BTW: Not an expert, not a Can. lawyer, never worked in immigration
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down