Unfulfilled Residency Obligation, New Spousal App

hmmmmmmmm

Oh well. There are many options. As someone from a visa-exempt country, it may be possible for you to simply come to Canada and stay long enough to be in compliance with the RO and then apply for a new PR card. No guarantees.

No guarantees in particular as, upon arriving in Canada, you may be referred to secondary and examined regarding the RO and not much point in fighting it, you could have a removal order issued and stipulate to not filing an appeal, or otherwise surrender your status to the procedure that would allow you to enter Canada as a visitor. If you do this, then yes, your partner may sponsor you . . . but of course, in this your sponsor must be eligible to sponsor and you must otherwise meet the requirements all over again.

If you married and lived together outside Canada for at least 730 days, most interpretations of the "accompanying" a Canadian citizen provision would mean that you were then in compliance with the RO and would be entitled to renew the PR card (although you would have to physically come to Canada to do that). However, a recent IAD decision explicitly rejected this interpretation of "accompanying." (Though my recall is that the Federal Court cases are not at all ambiguous about this and that case was, in what I perceive, to be in error and if review is sought in the Federal Court a different result should be forthcoming.)

If you have a SIN for Canada, if you manage to arrive without being issued a removal order or surrendering status, you are good to stay and work. You do not need a valid PR card in possession to stay (though you may need one to obtain Health care coverage). I'd suspect the odds are fair to good that you could simply come to Canada in a manner (on a round trip ticket perhaps; flying to States and driving into Canada) that does not make it look like you are moving to Canada or intending to live in Canada, and not offering that you are a PR, that you would be allowed to enter and then, again, you would be allowed to stay.

Tthe amount more you'd pay for a round trip ticket that you use only one way is not a significant sum compared to the inconvenience and cost of having to go through the immigration process again. Additionally this approach would not facilitate bringing much of your stuff to Canada, least not for the near future . . . though you could arrange to have things shipped later. Caution: do not, however, make any misrepresentations upon seeking entry into Canada. Answer questions put to you honestly, without evasion. You do not need to volunteer much at all, but you do need to truly answer the question and truthfully answer the question (there is a difference, and you do need to do both). So, if they ask questions that might or will lead to a problem about your PR status, that's the breaks, accept it, be honest, and deal with it.

Common-law should be no more difficult than it is for a married couple, assuming there is solid proof of actually, physically living together as a conjugal couple for at least a full year, and, actually, because of the living together part, in many ways it can be easier.

Sponsored PR is a lot easier, and faster, than skilled worker. No comparison.

Previous status should have little bearing. Of course you have to disclose it, would want to disclose it, and it is part of who you are and your history, but for purposes of sponsored partner PR it should be essentially irrelevant: the only question is whether or not the relationship is genuine (must be of course) and whether or not it was entered into for the purpose of obtaining status (if so, not a qualifying relationship; by the way, this is what the IAD panel should have focused on in the case I referred to in which they ruled that the PR who was living with a Canadian citizen partner was not "accompanying" their partner and so their time together living abroad did not count toward the PR RO . . . the focus should have been on the genuineness of the relationship or whether it was entered into so that this person could save status, but . . . oh well).

Back to the married v. common-law:
Being married makes proof that the qualifying relationship exists easier for many whose life together in a common-law relationship lacked formality and lacks the factual indicators like joint bills and so on . . . but the married couple still must prove it is genuine, and a couple who has lived together for a full year has better proof of that.

Depending on finances, you could decide to simply take a holiday in Canada, two weeks, three weeks, and see how the trip goes. If you were going to do the spousal sponsor route, you need to get the adjudication of status done sooner or later anyway. You can accomplish that by either applying for a Travel Document (and when it is refused, do not appeal, and it becomes a final adjudication of status, returning you to the status of a Foreign National just like any other FN carrying the same national passport as you do) or by, as I say, coming to Canada on a holiday and seeing how it goes . . . and if not well, get the losing of status part done . . . but if it goes OK, perhaps plan to return soon to live.

Hi Dpenabill,