Common-law definition

[mike 1977]

Hi
I have a very complex case. This is only a small part of it.

Definition of Common-law
Common-law partner means, in relation to a person, an individual who is cohabiting with the person in a conjugal relationship, having so cohabitated for a period of at least one year.

I have had my relationship for approx. 10 years. I meet the definition in that the relationship is 10 years, but during the 10 years we have never had one continuous uninterrupted year. (This seems to be a common interpretation)
My common-law partner had her PR for approx. 12 years. She lost her PR as she did not meet the residency requirement because she needed to be with her child in Cuba.

Before she lost her PR status we applied to sponsor her child. We were approved with me as Co-Sponsor.
Before this process was completed she lost her PR.

The question is:
Because I was approved as a Co-Sponsor, does that mean that our relationship has been recognized and approved as Common-Law by IRCC. As I believe only a spouse can co-sponsor.

I am applying to sponsor her and her child.

Thanks

 

[canuck78]

No you don't meet the definition of common law. You did she get PR before? Unless you got married how did you prove the continuous 1 year of cohabitation needed to sponsor if you haven't completed it?

 

[mike 1977]

My partner previously got PR with her husband who is now deceased.

The Common-law definition is from
Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations
Common-law Partner means, in relation to a person, an individual who is cohabitating with the person in a conjugal relationship, having so cohabitated for a period of at least one year.

The word continuous is not in this definition.

To be a co-signer on a sponsorship you must be a spouse or common-law partner or conjugal partner.

The question still is:
By receiving Sponsor Approval as a co-signer on a previous application, have they not accepted our relationship as common-law. How could they accept it as common-law at that time and now say it is not.
(see previous post above)

Anyone
any opinions

 

[Hurlabrick]

My partner previously got PR with her husband who is now deceased.

The Common-law definition is from
Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations
Common-law Partner means, in relation to a person, an individual who is cohabitating with the person in a conjugal relationship, having so cohabitated for a period of at least one year.

The word continuous is not in this definition.

To be a co-signer on a sponsorship you must be a spouse or common-law partner or conjugal partner.

The question still is:
By receiving Sponsor Approval as a co-signer on a previous application, have they not accepted our relationship as common-law. How could they accept it as common-law at that time and now say it is not.
(see previous post above)

Anyone
any opinions

Under the CIC spousal sponsorship section here:

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigratio...rtner-dependent-child-complete-guide.html#who

It defines common law as:

You can sponsor the person as your common-law partner (same or opposite sex) as long as you’ve been living or have lived with your partner for at least 12 consecutive months in a marriage-like relationship.

The bold formatting is not mine, it is on the web page. So 12 consecutive months it

 

[mike 1977]

Under the CIC spousal sponsorship section here:

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigratio...rtner-dependent-child-complete-guide.html#who

It defines common law as:

You can sponsor the person as your common-law partner (same or opposite sex) as long as you’ve been living or have lived with your partner for at least 12 consecutive months in a marriage-like relationship.

The bold formatting is not mine, it is on the web page. So 12 consecutive months it

What are the requirements to be a co-signer

 

[Hurlabrick]

What are the requirements to be a co-signer

I don't know but what does it matter as you are not common law by that definition.

Perhaps you can attempt to clarify your case direct with CIC as they are of course the authority here, but I don't hold out much (i.e. any) hope.

 

[mike 1977]

I don't know but what does it matter as you are not common law by that definition.

Perhaps you can attempt to clarify your case direct with CIC as they are of course the authority here, but I don't hold out much (i.e. any) hope.

If I don't meet the definition then they should not have allowed me to be a co-signer on the previous application. If I meet the definition on one application then I meet the definition on all applications. Does that not make sense?

 

[Hurlabrick]

If I don't meet the definition then they should not have allowed me to be a co-signer on the previous application. If I meet the definition on one application then I meet the definition on all applications. Does that not make sense?

Honestly, best of luck with your line of argument with CIC.

You do not quality as common law for the purposes of spousal sponsorship.