Print Page | Close Window

visa extension and outland application

Printed From: Canada Immigration and Visa Discussion Forum
Category: Canada Immigration Topics
Forum Name: Family Class Sponsorship
Forum Description: A review of current sponsorship programs (permanent residence) promoting the reunion in Canada of close relatives from abroad.
URL: https://secure.immigration.ca/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6
Printed Date: 25 Oct 2020 at 4:26pm


Topic: visa extension and outland application
Posted By: sami55
Subject: visa extension and outland application
Date Posted: 29 Nov 2009 at 8:47am
answers especially from top memebers if possible please.. thank you


I came here from UK as a tourist visitor in April and stayed till August with my Canadian girl friend. So we spent 4 months together as a very close couple. Then in Sept I took her to UK (to meet my family) and in Oct she took me to India (to meet her family…)
She has PR.. we love each other and want to marry.. Since April everything is shared and relationship is genuine long term and continuing. Although we are not yet married we really treat each other as husband and wife already. cannot bear to be separated..

On 2nd November when I came back from UK the IO took more than 4 horrible hours to issue visitor record which expires on 23rd Feb..He suspected that I may try to settle here. The visitor record says must leave Canada by 23 Feb and hand that print out to them before leaving.

So I am back here again living with my Canadian girlfriend. Her divorce is being finalised so we cant marry until about mid Feb., which is only a few days before my visitors visa expires on 23rd Feb . I must not overstay.

What is the best option for me?
1 Apply for extension of visa. But on what grounds?
We could marry in a Hindu religious ceremony in early Jan but will that be recognised, because we will not have any marriage cert. Will that religious ceremony be good enough to apply for PR.& outland   spouse sponsoring AND implied status of extending vistors visa while it is being considered? And then we can submit the marriage certificate later after we get married in Feb.

2 .even if the religious ceremony is NOT recognised…I have implied status until my PR application is finalised…so it buys me the time to get married and make my case more stronger with the civil marriage followed up soon after submitting the application?

3 the other option is NOT to make any application whatsoever…simply leave Canada in Feb and come back for the third time in March as a tourist and get married then ..but it could be very stressful asking for tourist visa again for the third time …and its horrible living apart..and with the prospect of a possible outland interview as well, it’s a lot of trips ..to and from UK.
4 what about work permit ? when do I apply for that?
the outland spouse sponsoring is done while I am here in Canada.that goes to Mississauga but ..the extension of temporary visa has to be in vegreville …but when is best time to apply for work permit and where?




Replies:
Posted By: Karl
Date Posted: 29 Nov 2009 at 3:34pm
1. No, unless it is registered by the gov't and a marriage certificate is issued, it will not be valid for immigration purposes.
2. You do not have implied status while waiting for your PR application to be finalized. You have implied status while waiting for an extension of your visitor status, while the application is being processed.
3. It is up to you. Since you had such a hard time getting in, and it will be on your record when you try to re-enter, you may have an even harder time next time.
4. If you are applying outland there will not be a work permit as part of the process, but the good news is, outland applications are usually approved more quickly than you get a work permit with an inland application.

My advice for your situation, which is only a personal opinion: get married in a legally recognized manner, apply for PR, and make sure you send in a request for extension of stay so it is received at least 30 days before your status expires.


Posted By: job_seeker
Date Posted: 30 Nov 2009 at 9:21am
Originally posted by sami55 sami55 wrote:

answers especially from top memebers if possible please.. thank you


On 2nd November when I came back from UK the IO took more than 4 horrible hours to issue visitor record which expires on 23rd Feb..He suspected that I may try to settle here. The visitor record says must leave Canada by 23 Feb and hand that print out to them before leaving.

So I am back here again living with my Canadian girlfriend. Her divorce is being finalised so we cant marry until about mid Feb., which is only a few days before my visitors visa expires on 23rd Feb . I must not overstay.

What is the best option for me?
1 Apply for extension of visa. But on what grounds?
We could marry in a Hindu religious ceremony in early Jan but will that be recognised, because we will not have any marriage cert. Will that religious ceremony be good enough to apply for PR.& outland   spouse sponsoring AND implied status of extending vistors visa while it is being considered? And then we can submit the marriage certificate later after we get married in Feb.

how can you be sure that divorce proceedings will be over by january?

2 .even if the religious ceremony is NOT recognised…I have implied status until my PR application is finalised…so it buys me the time to get married and make my case more stronger with the civil marriage followed up soon after submitting the application?

send your application for visitor extension pretty close to the date of the end of the validity of your visitor record. They may not approve it but at least it buys you more time. Send it thru registered mail or courier and make sure it reaches CPC-V on or a little before Feb 23

3 the other option is NOT to make any application whatsoever…simply leave Canada in Feb and come back for the third time in March as a tourist and get married then ..but it could be very stressful asking for tourist visa again for the third time …and its horrible living apart..and with the prospect of a possible outland interview as well, it’s a lot of trips ..to and from UK.

seeing that you were given a visitor record means they have their "eye" on you and you may or may not be allowed entry

4 what about work permit ? when do I apply for that?
the outland spouse sponsoring is done while I am here in Canada.that goes to Mississauga but ..the extension of temporary visa has to be in vegreville …but when is best time to apply for work permit and where?

for in land sponsorships, I think you can apply after AIP outland(?) when you "land". Am not very sure of this





Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 01 Dec 2009 at 2:06am
I agree that you cannot be certain the divorce will be finalized at any certain date; timelines for legal proceedings anywhere tend to be unpredictable and delays are perhaps more common than not. Best to not count on that happening until the ink is scratched on paper, or at least the final step leading to the issuance of a final disposition is done.

Problem with filing an application to extend your stay is that unless you are, at the time of submitting it, in a *qualified relationship," AND your partner submits at least a letter evidencing an intent 1) to sponsor you for PR, and 2) to support you during your stay in Canada, as well as finance your return to the UK if and when that is required (unless you can document sufficient funds, as in many thousands of dollars, to support yourself and finance your way home), that application stands a high probability of being rejected.

You would have implied status pending the decision on an app to extend, yes, but in your circumstances you should probably not wait until the last minute to submit it . . . technically it is supposed to be submitted at least 30 days prior to expiration of current status, and while the experience of many is that so long as it is received in Vegreville prior (even if just one day prior) to the day one's status expires, that does not usually affect the decision (I myself submitted one with less than 30 days left and it was granted), where you have a firm "must leave by date" being strictly compliant with the rules is probably the better course to take -- that is, to rely on having "implied status" when you have a firm must leave by date you probably want to send the app in right at the thirty day mark.

Here is the rub: you are not doing yourself any favors if you submit an app to extend that will be denied, even if implied status gives you two to four more months (I don't know the current timeline for these apps, which can vary from five or six weeks to several months, depending . . .) unless you are absolutely certain that you can, at the least, get married in time before you leave.

Noting: that I agree with the caution that you may have much more difficulty returning to and entering Canada in the future once you leave (unless you have been away for an extended time and have re-established ties at home, especially a job). So, if by chance, you had to leave before getting married (and again you cannot rely on the divorce being final until it is almost certain, at the soonest), you could run into quite a bit of difficulty getting physically back together to actually get married, to establish the qualifying relationship necessary for sponsorship.

Now if you are certain the divorce is about to be finalized, you may delay sending in the app to extend . . . because if you get it submitted before your must leave date and you are married and your spouse includes the letter I mentioned, then you have much better odds of it being approved . . . and for an extra margin, you could pay the PR app fees and include a copy of the receipt in the app to extend package, even if you are not ready to actually submit the entire PR app (it takes time and work to put that together, and you need the marriage certificate not just the fact of having been married).

IF, IF, you have to leave before getting married, and you want to return sooner rather than later, you might consider flying to the States, meeting your partner there, getting married there (you would have to research best state in which to get married without either being a resident . . . Nevada works, perhaps others), and then you have a very good chance of getting into Canada if you are accompanied by your partner, you have certificate of marriage, and you have receipt showing PR app fees paid.

-------------
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


Posted By: mitamata
Date Posted: 01 Dec 2009 at 2:45am
Ditto to all above.

I just want to add a thing about the wedding... you mentioned a religious ceremony.

No, it would not be legally recognized, but that doesn't mean you can't have it before. Especially if you think you won't be able to have it at a later date (if for example you won't be able to get into Canada and wanted to have it there). When you DO get legally married and apply for PR as a spouse, it will be a good thing for you to be able to show you did have a religious ceremony. If a couple is religious, CIC expects them to have a religious ceremony and they often ask for an explanation as to why there wasn't one if that is the case.

-------------
Outland - spousal - Vienna - 2009
Feb 16th - app received at CPC-M
Mar 3rd - decision made at CPC-M
Mar 27th - received AOR
Apr 29th - PPR received via email
May 12th - Passport with visa received :)


Posted By: job_seeker
Date Posted: 01 Dec 2009 at 3:22am
Thanks for the clarifications, dpenabill.


Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 01 Dec 2009 at 6:55am
The extent to which a religious wedding bears much weight is very much dependent on the background, culture, and religions of the couple getting married. And, too, where the marriage takes place (for example, as I understand it there are more than a few countries in which the legality, not merely the genuineness, of a marriage may depend on meeting religious requirements depending on who is getting married).

For many, it makes virtually no difference. As a general rule, I suspect the more westernized the couple is, the less significant a religious wedding is. Remember: this goes to the *genuineness* of the relationship, not its existence (legality) (with exceptions in some countries, as I already noted). So it is mostly a matter of whether or not, for this couple, a civil wedding makes sense, and practically I doubt it looms large at all unless one looking at the couple (and their background, culture, religion) might readily perceive that a civil (or otherwise inconsistent with their religion) marriage actually does not make sense.

For some, yes, particularly those whose background is devoutly religious in nature, from a culture with strong traditions steeped in ceremony, the lack of a religious wedding probably needs to be explained, and, actually, credibly, convincingly explained, an explanation consistent with the mores and traditions of the couple.

Moreover, for couples with limited proof to establish the genuineness of their relationship, a religious ceremony might be one way of adding weight to their proof . . . but only if their backgrounds (et al) suggest the importance of this.

-------------
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


Posted By: whoopi83
Date Posted: 01 Dec 2009 at 11:36am
Also worth noting; if you do manage to get an extension in February and your partner's divorce is not final, you may (providing you reach April and can provide the evidence) apply as a common law couple.  The fact that one is married will have no effect providing a common law relationship could have been established.  (See OP2 manual).  Our application was approved and the sponsor is still legally married to another although we did send a copy of the divorce petition etc.

-------------
Applied via London 12 Aug 2009.
Landed 23 Dec 2009.

ALL DONE!


Posted By: tgchi13
Date Posted: 01 Dec 2009 at 7:00pm
Originally posted by whoopi83 whoopi83 wrote:

Also worth noting; if you do manage to get an extension in February and your partner's divorce is not final, you may (providing you reach April and can provide the evidence) apply as a common law couple.  The fact that one is married will have no effect providing a common law relationship could have been established.  (See OP2 manual).  Our application was approved and the sponsor is still legally married to another although we did send a copy of the divorce petition etc.


Claiming a common-law marriage while married isn't bigamy? Learn something new every day! I thought this type of situation was for the conjugal application.


Posted By: mitamata
Date Posted: 01 Dec 2009 at 7:08pm
There is no such thing as a "common-law marriage". It's a common-law relationship. And no, it's not "bigamy" but it's only recognized if the marriage has been dissolved, meaning the spouses are now living separately. So for example you can't be both married and have a common-law partner living in the same house.

-------------
Outland - spousal - Vienna - 2009
Feb 16th - app received at CPC-M
Mar 3rd - decision made at CPC-M
Mar 27th - received AOR
Apr 29th - PPR received via email
May 12th - Passport with visa received :)


Posted By: dpenabill
Date Posted: 02 Dec 2009 at 6:12am
Ahh the nuances of language.

The gist of it is clear.

The terms, though, may be the object of quibbling.

A "dissolved" marriage is (as I understand the use of the terms) a legality, a term of art so to say, which the requires the issuance and filing of a judicial decree in Canada and the U.S.

A person who is still "legally" married can be in a common-law relationship with another for the purposes of immigration if the marriage relationship was terminated prior to the commencement of the cohabitation in a conjugal relationship with the common-law partner; note, though, that I believe CIC approaches such situations with much skepticism unless there is a legal impediment to the person's divorce (in which case I believe they still apply more scrutiny but not necessarily so skeptically). In particular, while I am not sure, it is my impression that given the relative ease (emphasis on relative, since it is not really "easy") of obtaining a divorce (a decree dissolving the marriage) in Canada, a Canadian claiming a common-law relationship while still legally married better have very stong evidence of both the in fact termination of a conjugal relationship with the spouse as well as the interdependency and commingling of affairs while cohabitating in a conjugal relationship with the putative common-law partner.

Not sure what effect it would have if the early part of the period of time for establishing the requisite cohabitation in a common-law relationship was while one partner was still legally married so long as there was a final divorce prior to the date the app was submitted; I suspect a degree of more scrutiny but not necessarily strong skepticism.

It should be emphasized that what "common-law" means, and what legal effects it has, varies considerably from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and depending on the purpose or context in which it arises. This is to say that CIC has its own definition and that is the definition that counts for immigration purposes -- that does not change the couple's status for any other purpose in any other place. And the reverse is also true: even if a relationship fully meets the terms of what constitutes "common-law" in the jurisdiction where the couple has been staying, that bears little or no weight relative to CIC's purposes; the CIC definition is the one that counts.

-------------
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


Posted By: whoopi83
Date Posted: 02 Dec 2009 at 7:34am
Originally posted by dpenabill dpenabill wrote:

Ahh the nuances of language.

The gist of it is clear.

The terms, though, may be the object of quibbling.

A "dissolved" marriage is (as I understand the use of the terms) a legality, a term of art so to say, which the requires the issuance and filing of a judicial decree in Canada and the U.S.

A person who is still "legally" married can be in a common-law relationship with another for the purposes of immigration if the marriage relationship was terminated prior to the commencement of the cohabitation in a conjugal relationship with the common-law partner; note, though, that I believe CIC approaches such situations with much skepticism unless there is a legal impediment to the person's divorce (in which case I believe they still apply more scrutiny but not necessarily so skeptically). In particular, while I am not sure, it is my impression that given the relative ease (emphasis on relative, since it is not really "easy") of obtaining a divorce (a decree dissolving the marriage) in Canada, a Canadian claiming a common-law relationship while still legally married better have very stong evidence of both the in fact termination of a conjugal relationship with the spouse as well as the interdependency and commingling of affairs while cohabitating in a conjugal relationship with the putative common-law partner.

Not sure what effect it would have if the early part of the period of time for establishing the requisite cohabitation in a common-law relationship was while one partner was still legally married so long as there was a final divorce prior to the date the app was submitted; I suspect a degree of more scrutiny but not necessarily strong skepticism.

It should be emphasized that what "common-law" means, and what legal effects it has, varies considerably from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, and depending on the purpose or context in which it arises. This is to say that CIC has its own definition and that is the definition that counts for immigration purposes -- that does not change the couple's status for any other purpose in any other place. And the reverse is also true: even if a relationship fully meets the terms of what constitutes "common-law" in the jurisdiction where the couple has been staying, that bears little or no weight relative to CIC's purposes; the CIC definition is the one that counts.
 
 
dpenabill - I agree with your post - just to clarify our actual situation: the sponsor and PR applicant had been living together for 3 years.  UK divorce law requires that a marriage has broken down irretrievably and to establish this one must show: adultery or, unreasonable behaviour or, desertion or, 2 yr seperation or, 5 year seperation (uncontestable).  Petition was filed with the court after 2 years with both parties consent.  The court has a "backlog" and routine cases are taking months and months... (14 months to decree nisi) but my point is that the only document we sent with the application package was a copy of the petition (plus a copy of the relevant section from the OP2 manual).  We of course supplied ample "evidence" to support our cohabitation claim including letters from all family members. 
 
CPC-M approved the sponsor the same day and London approved the PR applicant in 7 working days (from open file to PPR).  This leads me to believe that provided the correct evidence is included in the application AND the relationship is shown (as much as possible) to be genuine, it can be faster (or not Confused) than legally married couples who may have trouble providing what CIC require.
 
OR perhaps we were just lucky; the rest of the year has been ****!  Ouch
 
 
 
 


Posted By: sami55
Date Posted: 02 Dec 2009 at 10:30pm
PLEASE NOTE WELL... THE ABOVE BACKGROUND facts APPLy TO WHOOPI83 only not me.

I AM SAMI55   I am THE APPLICANT man from uk in a GENUINE, CLOSE, long term and continuing relatioship with canadian sponsor since this april = 7 months, although we have been in contact with each other a bit longer then that..
my canadian girl friend (sponsor)was desereted in uk,by her husband in 2002, completely disappeared in UK, after only a few months of euphemeral marriage in 2002. this was accepted by the canadian immigration when she came here as a skilled worker in march 2008. so SHE HAS seven years of TOTAL and iretrievable breakdown in the marriage and she has filed for divorce in AUGUST 2009. our relation is very genuine indeed.
my fiancee's divorce is at a stage where div order is expected on 05 january (then 31 days later = divorce cert= 05 Feb ) you need that certificate to do all the procedures involved in getting married.. i need auth and opinion on MY uk divorce to get the licence which is needed to book the wedding ceremony...too many long procedures in beauracracy and during snow..so we may not be able to marry before my visa ends in 23 feb. too many balls are up in the air,

one lawyer said i could go to uk and get married over the telephone ..
can any one please comment on this please..
i think common law will be a very remote possibility for me.the acrobatics involved in that will be too much for my situation..i dont like the immigration in control of the safety net...
i am also ruling out going to us to get married because she has indian passport with canadian PR... we can both go to uk or india..prob is she cant any more time off work..

i know no act is easy in the immigration circus but please suggest the safest route, least painful course.

remember the I O strongly suspected relationship last time i came here in nov.....and i have a petty assault against me in uk, but that is a spent conviction...he gave me just a 4 months visitor record suggests he has an eye on me..

can i extend my visitor visa on the INTENT to sponsor me? on the basis of applying for marriage licence...with an impending marriage booking?
thats the only thing thats missing, a qualifying relationship..everything elase i have in abundance and provable..
help






Print Page | Close Window