|
|
| Subject: Genuine Marriage - Bogus marriage |
|
|
|
Regulation 4 which defines a MARRIAGE will be changed.
It currently says;
4. For the purposes of these Regulations, a foreign national shall not be considered a spouse, a common-law partner, a conjugal partner or an adopted child of a person if the marriage, common-law partnership, conjugal partnership or adoption is not genuine and was entered into primarily for the purpose of acquiring any status or privilege under the Act.
SOR/2004-167, s. 3(E).
It says (and) which was a two prong test. CIC is changing it to (or)and removing the adoption part to regulation 117 (2)
that makes it an either prong test.
For the purposes of assessing the bona fides of spousal, common-law and conjugal relationships and adoptions, CIC is proposing to amend the Regulations as follows:
(1) Create a disjunctive relationship between the “genuineness” element and the “purpose” element of the bad faith assessment. This will clarify that a finding of bad faith can be made if either of these elements is present.
(2) Move the “bad faith” test for sponsored adoptions from R4 to the relevant sections in R117 to ensure greater clarity in the Regulations. R4 will continue to apply to non-sponsored adoptions where no provincial jurisdiction exists.
These changes will allow officers to refuse a case if either of the “bad faith” tests are met. It is expected that, in most cases, officers will focus on the “primary purpose” test. However, evidence of a lack of genuineness of the relationship will still be relevant in examining whether a relationship was entered into for status or privilege under the Act.
Immigration officers called upon to decide these matters face an exceedingly difficult task. They must proceed cautiously and carefully, ever aware of the need to facilitate family reunification, while at the same time safeguarding the integrity of the immigration process. They rarely, if ever, have admissions from applicants of intent to circumvent normal immigration requirements. Nor do they often uncover collusive contracts where money has exchanged hands in the advancement of an immigration outcome. Normally intent must be inferred from the conduct of the parties and the particular circumstances of the case.
If immigration officers are presented with indications or evidence that a relationship is not genuine, this may reasonably lead an officer to suspect that the relationship was entered into to circumvent immigration requirements in order to obtain status or privilege under the Act.
Even if it cannot be established that a relationship was not entered into primarily to attain an immigration benefit, it may still fail to be a genuine relationship at the time the decision is made by an immigration officer. An important example would be a forced marriage, where true consent between the parties is lacking, perhaps as the result of the undue influence of an overbearing third party. Another example would be where a bona fide relationship has broken down before the application was submitted, with the parties no longer sharing a common commitment to the relationship but using that relationship to gain a status or privilege under the Act.
*******
GET TO WORK PROVING YOUR RELATIONSHIP!
Roy
cvimmigration.com
[03-04-2010,09:10]
[**.229.28.7]
Roy |
|
(in reply to: Genuine Marriage - Bogus marriage)
so a couple that are contemplating divorce but holding off until the sponsorship applicant lands could be in for some trouble.
[03-04-2010,13:53]
[**.154.245.217]
Sharon |
(in reply to: Genuine Marriage - Bogus marriage)
This is far more about sponsorship with one already a PR or Canadian.
Before it was silly to refuse an Indian or Pakistani couple who had entered into an arranged marriage because the applicant got married knowing he/she would be seeking an advantage under the Act.
People who immigrate thinking they can get a divorce in Canada when they arrive get a huge surprise because they have to live seperate and apart for one year.
Roy
cvimmigration.com
[05-04-2010,08:00]
[**.229.28.7]
Roy |
|
