担保人PR身份，夫妻担保审理时，在中国（不在加拿大），申请被拒，上诉成功
- Admin
- 2025年3月6日
- 讀畢需時 4 分鐘
在加拿大移民难民保护移民法规（”IRPR")130条中提到，担保人永久居民身份（“PR"), 要想满足资格条件来担保家属，其中一个条件是R130(1)(b)，是需要担保人居住在加拿大“reside in Canada”。也就是说，如果担保人在递交申请时，以及审理过程中，直到案件结束，如果没有满足该资格条件，该担保人就不满足资格要求，就极有可能会造成担保申请被拒。
Sponsor
130 (1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3), a sponsor, for the purpose of sponsoring a foreign national who makes an application for a permanent resident visa as a member of the family class or an application to remain in Canada as a member of the spouse or common-law partner in Canada class under subsection 13(1) of the Act, must be a Canadian citizen or permanent resident who
(a) is at least 18 years of age;
(b) resides in Canada; and
(c) has filed a sponsorship application in respect of a member of the family class or the spouse or common-law partner in Canada class in accordance with section 10.
Sponsor not residing in Canada
(2) A sponsor who is a Canadian citizen and does not reside in Canada may sponsor a foreign national who makes an application referred to in subsection (1) and is the sponsor’s spouse, common-law partner, conjugal partner or dependent child who has no dependent children, if the sponsor will reside in Canada when the foreign national becomes a permanent resident.
可是，居住在加拿大的定义是什么呢？是要求该担保人满足居住义务吗？还是要求担保人在审理的整个过程都人居住在加拿大呢？法规中，以及政策中，并没有提供详细的定义。在法庭先例中，有提供一些考量因素。
[13] 联邦法院在 Iao案中认为，IAD采用Koo案中阐明的测试（并在Gao中进行了修改）来确定担保人是否居住在加拿大，这并非没有道理。Iao 中确定的评估担保人是否居住在加拿大的因素，并在本上诉中予以考虑。它们如下：
Was the sponsor physically present in Canada for a long period prior to recent absences, which occurred immediately before or during the application to sponsor the application for a PR visa? What is the extent of the appellant’s physical presence in Canada prior to sponsoring an application for permanent residence?（担保人在最近离开加拿大之前是否在加拿大停留了很长时间，不在加拿大这段时间在申请担保申请递交之前或审理期间？上诉人在担保申请之前在加拿大的实际居住程度是多少？）
What is the extent of the appellant’s physical absences from Canada?（上诉人即担保人实际不在加拿大的程度如何？）
What is the location of the appellant’s immediate family and dependents?（上诉人即担保人的直系亲属和孩子在哪里？）
Does the pattern of physical presence in Canada indicate a returning home or merely visiting Canada?（在加拿大的实际生活模式是否表明他们是属于回国或仅仅访问加拿大？）
What is the quality of the connection with Canada: Is it more substantial than that which exists with any other country?（与加拿大的联系程度如何：它是否比与任何其他国家存在的联系更强？）和
Any other factor – provided that it assists in the determination of whether the sponsor “has centralized his or her mode of living in Canada（任何其他因素 – 前提是它有助于确定上诉人即担保人是否“已将其生活方式集中在加拿大”）。
该上诉从上诉人的多方面来进行了考量：
The appellant’s physical presence in Canada上诉人在加拿大的居住
2012年和父亲以及继母一起移民，来到加拿大，过去3年都有在全职工作，去中国探访后可以再回到自己加拿大的工作。
担保申请2017年8月9日递交，担保人2017年9月去中国和申请人（被担保人一起），2018年4月回加拿大。2018年3月23日担保申请被拒。
[14]It is clear from the evidence that the appellant was not residing in Canada during the relevant period. However, there is sufficient evidence before me to demonstrate that since her landing in Canada and prior to making the application to sponsor the applicant’s PR application, the appellant resided in Canada with her family and worked in Canada.（从证据中可以清楚地看出，上诉人在相关期间没有居住在加拿大。然而，我面前有足够的证据证明，自从她登陆加拿大以来，在申请担保申请人的永久居民身份申请之前，上诉人与家人一起居住在加拿大，并在加拿大工作。）
Location of the appellant’s immediate family and dependents and quality of connection in Canada
上诉人的直系亲属和家属在加拿大的位置和关系质量
申诉人的家属，父亲，兄弟姐妹，都住在加拿大。中国有自己的先生，以及祖母。
[15]Aside from her husband in China, her quality of connection to Canada is, in my view, more substantial than to China.“除了她在中国的丈夫之外，在我看来，她与加拿大的联系质量比与中国的联系更重要。 ”
Pattern of physical presence实际居留模式
[16]I find the appellant’s pattern of physical presence in Canada is indicative of returning home and not to visit Canada.我发现上诉人在加拿大的实际居留模式表明她回国而不是访问加拿大。
委员结论:
I find the totality of evidence before me supports a conclusion that the appellant was well established in Canada prior to her marriage to the applicant and left Canada for the purpose of spending time with her spouse. After weighing all of the Iao20 factors, I find she has demonstrated that she resides in Canada as required by section 130(1)b) of the regulations. Therefore, the appellant is a sponsor for the purposes of sponsoring a foreign national who makes an application for a permanent resident visa as a member of the family class.“我发现摆在我面前的全部证据都支持一个结论，即上诉人在与申请人结婚之前已经在加拿大建立了良好的根基，她离开加拿大与她的配偶共度时光。在权衡了所有因素后，我发现她已经证明她满足法规第 130（1）（b） 条的要求居住在加拿大。因此，上诉人满足担保人的资格条件。“
留言