Latest Canada Immigration News

New Policy 90 Day Re-Take Rule

From 1 May 2006 the policy on candidates re-taking IELTS will be amended. The restriction on re-taking IELTS within 90 days will be removed and candidates will be able to repeat the test whenever they wish.

The current restriction on repeating the test within 90 days at any centre will remain in place for all candidates until the end of April 2006. All candidates from 1 May will be able to repeat at the next available test, regardless of the date of their previous test.

IELTS is now used by a range of receiving organisations across the world and many of them require candidates to demonstrate adequate performance overall as well as by individual skill. It is possible for candidates to attain their required overall band score but fail to achieve a specific module score in a particular skill area. As a result they are required to re-take the test but have to wait 90 days and this can result in hardship and distress. It is in the nature of tests that scores on individual components may vary to some extent from occasion to occasion and a candidate may be able to make limited improvements in their performance when repeating the test. In consideration of this the decision was made to remove the re-take restrictions.

It should be noted however that IELTS scores are not substantially improved merely by taking the test on multiple occasions. To significantly improve a score it is necessary to engage in further study of a serious nature. Gain score studies carried out under the IELTS funded research programme indicate that scores are unlikely to improve dramatically without extensive English language tuition in the interim.

Candidates will still be asked to indicate on their application form whether they have taken the test before. This information will appear on the Test Report Form and will only be used for monitoring purposes.

http://www.ielts.org/mediacentre/latestieltsdevelopments/article202.aspx.


Rochelle Rainford,

Quebec Immigration Application and Lock-in Dates

The application date for most immigrant categories is the date on which a complete application is received by the Embassy. When received by the Embassy, all applications are date-stamped and this date is considered the application date for both Federal Economic and Quebec Economic files. The application date is usually used as a reference to calculate the processing times.

On the other hand, the lock-in date is a reference point used to freeze certain factors for the purpose of processing applications, such as the dependency or payable fees. On Federal Economic files, the application date and the lock-in date are the same, namely, the date on which a complete application, with fees, is received by the Embassy.



However, for Quebec Economic files, the application date and the lock-in date are different. Indeed, unlike applicants destined to other provinces, since the application is first submitted to the Service d’Immigration du Québec (SIQ), the lock-in date is the date the application for a Certificate of Selection from Quebec (CSQ) is received by Quebec. In certain cases, when there is no proof of when the file was received by Quebec, the date of the CSQ issuance will be used as the lock-in date. The fees payable for the dependent child should also be determined based on the age of the child at the lock in date. For example, if a child was 21 years old when the application for a CSQ was submitted but is 23 years old when the application is received by the Embassy, the fee would be $150 (i.e. fee for a 21 year old).

Please also note that for Quebec selected entrepreneur cases, the conditions lock-in date is the CSQ issuance date.

Veronique Raymond, Attorney at Law.

Canadian Residency obligations

Following the globalization of markets and businesses, Canada has been forced to recognize over the years that the need to travel and spend extended periods of time away from the home for personal, economical or social purposes is a reality that touches everyone, even permanent residents. This realization was confirmed in 2002 with the imposition of a new residency obligation on permanent residents included in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA). Although, the new obligation is much more lenient and offers more freedom to permanent residents then the 183 days rule found in the previous Immigration Act, several permanent residents still find themselves in breach of their residency obligation and thus, their permanent resident status in jeopardy.

We would like to review with you the specifics of the residency obligation along with several factors that may be considered in determining if Humanitarian and Compassionate Considerations may be considered to maintain one’s permanent residence status.

The residency obligation

According to IRPA, a permanent resident must be physically present in Canada for a total of at least 730 days out of any given period of five years. This means that a person may spend up to three years outside Canada and still maintain his or her permanent resident status.

It is important to also note that some of the time spent outside Canada will be considered as time spent physically in Canada for the purpose of maintaining permanent residency. Indeed, a person will retain his or her status if he or she spends time outside Canada for the purpose of accompanying a Canadian citizen who is their spouse or common-law partner, or in the case of a child, their parent.

This also applies to time spent outside Canada by permanent residents, their spouse and children, in cases where the permanent resident is employed by a Canadian Business or if he or she is employed in the public service of Canada or of a province. In these cases, the time spent outside Canada must be related to work activities.

What happens if a permanent resident is not able to demonstrate that he satisfies the residency obligation?

In some cases, an officer may determine that humanitarian and compassionate considerations, which take into account the best interests of a child directly affected by the determination, justify the retention of permanent resident status and thus defeat any breach of the permanent residency obligation.

Other than the best interest of the child, which is clearly stated in the IRPA and considered the most important and compelling factor in determining if humanitarian and compassionate considerations should intervene in a residency hearing, there are other factors which may influence the retention of permanent residency when a breach of the conditions has occurred. These factors are very similar than the ones found in the previous Act.

In certain cases, if an applicant is able to provide a reasonable explanation as to why he or she had to stay absent from Canada for a long period of time, an appeal is likely to be successful. In those cases, the permanent resident will need to demonstrate that his or her absence was always temporary, no matter how long it had been since he or she left Canada. In the past, people who had to leave the country temporarily to care for sick relatives for example, had good chances of success.

The appellant’s age may also be relevant. For example, if at the time the person left Canada he or she was a minor, it is highly unlikely that the child in question was able to make a conscious and/or independent decision to leave Canada. If the child returned promptly after he or she reached the age of majority or as soon as it was financially feasible, in cases of abject poverty, to do so, removal order appeals under these circumstances were successful in the past.

On the other hand, permanent residents who are absent from Canada for extended periods of time and who re-settled in their home country, making few attempts to distance themselves from their home country to permanently settle in Canada, will have a harder time justifying their absence and demonstrating humanitarian considerations. Essentially, the longer the time spent in Canada prior to your departure and the more ties you make with Canada, the easier it will be to demonstrate that your intention was temporary and that you did not intend to abandon Canada as your primary residential country.

Although these are all potential remedies for a breach of the permanent residency obligations, it is always better for permanent residents to do everything in their power to respect the 730 days condition to avoid a deportation order and/or the terrifying moments that can be created by a deportation hearing. As the new residency obligation is much more lenient then in the one found in the previous Immigration Act, taking into account international mobility, it is now, more than ever, easier for permanent residents to maintain their permanent residency status in Canada and travel the world for business or pleasure.


Veronique Raymond, Attorney at Law.

New Canadian Immigration Minister to reduce fees

The Honourable Monte Solberg, P.C., M.P. has been appointed Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Canada. Solberg is a family man who prior to entering public life was a successful broadcaster and director of the Albert Association of Broadcasters.

In 1993 Solberg was elected to the House of Commons and re-elected in 1997, 2000, 2004 and 2006. On March 20th, 2006 the Honourable Monte Solberg made a speech at a conference in Toronto indicating that the promise of reducing immigration fees is in process. The Right of Permanent Resident Fee which is presently CAD$ 975 per adult over the age of 22 will be reduced by half.

"Our efforts should be focused on welcoming newcomers and helping them fit in, not taxing them to death".

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his government are putting into place systems to assess foreign credentials so that new immigrants may obtain better employment. Another priority of the Canadian government will be to award citizenship to children adopted outside of Canada by Canadian parents.

Solberg could not advise exactly when the fee reduction would take place. The professionals at RSS will only submit the Right of Permanent Resident Fee at the end of an application process. Delaying the submission of an application until the reduction is effective would not benefit an applicant. Our experience at RSS is that this fee is not payable until 12 - 36 months after submission of an application.