Canadian Sponsorship of Adopted Children and Other Relatives for Permanent Residence: A Brief Overview of the Low Income Cut-Off (LICO)

By Author: Admin | June 7, 2017

Canadian Sponsorship of Adopted Children and Other Relatives for Permanent Residence: A Brief Overview of the Low Income Cut-Off (LICO)

Canada_Sponsorship_Adopted_Children_Permanent_Residence_Chaudhary_Law_Office_Immigrationsource: https://afth.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/SPRING-SUMMER-ISTOCK-Bi-racial-family.jpg

      The sponsorship of an adopted child or other relative can be an exciting and joyful prospect. There are many important factors to consider if you are hoping to sponsor an adopted child or other relative in Canada. The sponsorship of an adopted child or other relative is a significant commitment which entails a number of important obligations that are associated with this undertaking. A sponsor is compelled to provide necessary financial support and basic requirements for the sponsored adopted child or other relative. As the financial obligation to provide support for sponsored adopted children and other relatives is significant and binding, the government of Canada requires a sponsor to meet relevant minimum income requirements.

     The federal government of Canada issued a Federal Income Table which dictates the relevant criteria associated with the Low Income Cut-Off (LICO) for sponsors of adopted children and other relatives in provinces other than Quebec. An applicant, who is hoping to act as a sponsor must provide proof of their available income in the form of a Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) Notice of Assessment.

    The minimum required income for an applicant sponsor under the Low Income Cut-Off (LICO) criteria is $24,600 for a one-person household (consisting of the sponsor alone). The minimum required income increases relative to the size of the sponsor’s family unit. A relevant chart pertaining to the Low Income Cut-Off (LICO) from the Sponsor’s Guide for Sponsorship of Adopted Children and other relatives has been included below.

Low Income Cut-Off (LICO)  – 2017

Size of Family Unit     Minimum necessary income

1 person (the sponsor) $24,600

2 persons         $30,625

3 persons         $37,650

4 persons         $45,712

5 persons         $51,846

6 persons         $58,473

7 persons         $65,101

More than 7 persons, for each additional person, add $6,628.

    For more information it may be helpful to consult the Sponsor’s Guide (IMM 5196) for Sponsorship of adopted children and other relatives.

Sponsoring an adopted child or other relative can be a complex process. If you require assistance in creating an application for the sponsorship of an adopted child or other relative contact  Chaudhary Law Office.

Express Entry Draw of May 26, 2017 – FSTC lowest to Date

By Author: Admin | May 29, 2017

Express Entry Draw of May 26, 2017 – FSTC lowest to Date

Immigration Canada Federal Skilled worker program Chaudhary Law

The Express Entry draw of May 26, 2017 was, for the Federal Skilled Trades Category (FSTC) and not the Canada Experience Class or the Federal Skilled Worker Class, the lowest ever at 199 points. The FSTC category is distinguished by the lower score required in English and / or French. However, the available occupations are limited to technical ones, and requires a job offer in Canada, or a licence to ply the intended trade issued by the appropriate provincial authority.

The draw of 2017-05-26 also had a second minimum threshold of 775 points confined to those Express Entry profiles that were eligible for a Provincial Nominee Program. Most provincial nominee programs require work experience in the province, and evidence that the individual would reside in the province if granted permanent resident status.

As a whole, this Express Entry draw looks optimistically low (in terms of minimum requirements), but in fact, is a draw that is confined to Express Entry profiles with very distinguishing features than those that are usualy encountered under the Express Entry System, as described above.

On the positive side, the low score given for the FSTC is an acknowledgement that the level of English or French for persons in those hands-on or technical occupations need not be particularly high, given the specialized skills possessed by those FSTC .

The need for immigrants with diverse skills is consistent with Canada’s burgeoning services sector which complements Canada’s diverse economic base. Similarly, the accommodation of immigrants who are destined to the less populous provinces of Canada would help allay the problems associated with population growth being confined to Canada’s large cities, such as environmental sustainability.

A related issue is whether those immigrants who were granted status in one of the smaller provinces will remain in said smaller province. The populations of such provinces being low (with concomitantly less economic opportunity) may mean that the provincial nominee programs intent of spreading immigration to smaller provinces may be more difficult if new immigrants can’t economically support themselves, or (as is the intent of provincial business programs,) create a job opportunity for themselves. This concern is particularly amplified given mobility rights accorded to permanent residents under Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

If you need help with creating an Express Entry profile or have questions regarding the Comprehensive Ranking System, contact the Chaudhary Law Office.

Hearings at the Immigration Division – Admissibility and Detention Review

By Author: Admin | May 24, 2017

Hearings at the Immigration Division – Admissibility Hearing and Detention Review

chaudhary law office picture of detention center

Located at 385 Rexdale Boulevard, the Immigration Division of the Immigration Refugee Board not only decides on the liberty of those detained therein, but also whether a permanent resident or foreign national should be deported from Canada.

Some hearings take longer than others.  For example, hearings relating to criminality may be relatively short (particularly where there is no dispute that a person was convicted of a crime).  On the other hand, highly contested hearing may take two or three days. . Lengthier hearings may be associated with matters such as misrepresentation of a material fact under Canada’s immigration laws.

The outcome of such hearings often culminate in an oral decision.  The oral decision is dictated to the parties.  Other tribunals such as the Refugee Protection Division or Immigration Appeal Division opt to send the decision in the mail, rather than forcing the parties to listen to one’s life in Canada being allowed to continue (or conversely an oral pronouncement as to why a person’s life in Canada is terminated).  The assumption may be that counsel duly retained to represent a person concerned cannot be entrusted to convey a decision to her client.  Rather, the client must be hauled into the hearing in person to hear the decision.

It is a challenge when parties are summoned to return only for the purpose of listening to a live dictation of the reasons for decision, particularly where the Member recites neutral facts and reserves the pronouncement for the end of the oral recitation.   The anticipation has to be contained.  Such anticipation is amplified if the person who is the subject of the decision is not conversant with either official language.  Some clients, upon hearing the result, uttered after a long narrative don’t understand, leading counsel to translate in a rudimentary way such as “You Won,” or, “You Lost.”

Many Members at the Immigration Division are appointed from the ranks of the Canada Border Service Agency (“CBSA”).  There is an uncomfortable feeling that the culture of enforcement associated with working as a CBSA employee colours the view of individuals who are subject of an admissibility hearing.  The mandate of the CBSA officers is to pay high degree of scrutiny to those seeking entry to Canada.  Some CBSA officers are allowed to carry firearms.  The phenomenon of individuals behaving badly, (documented in shows such as “Border Security” ) reinforces a culture of enforcement.  A  culture of enforcement may be minimally described as possessing a more skeptical view of everything uttered or written by a candidate seeking a visa to Canada; a prism that emphasizes the darker characteristics of human behaviour.

The seating position in the hearing room favours the CBSA, where the CBSA representative generally sits near the exit to the courtroom.  Such a position assumes the worse case scenario: that the client, upon receiving a decision that his life in Canada is over (through the issuance of a deportation order), may react in a way that necessitates a speedy getaway for the CBSA officer away from said hearing room.

Fun fact: the desk within the hearing room where the CBSA officer sits contains a discrete button that contacts security in the event  dangerous conduct transpires within said hearing room.  I presume this includes dangerous conduct of wayward counsel as well as their clients.

Sponsoring Children for permanent residence in Canada when Custody is an Issue

By Author: Admin | May 16, 2017

The Challenge of Sponsoring Children for permanent residence in Canada (or Using Humanitarian and Compassionate arguments)  when Custody Is An Issue

Children-sponsorship-canada-Permanent-Residence-Chaudhary-Law

Sponsorship of children under the family class requires a parental relationship.  This relationship  must be by blood, or adoption.   More details can be seen here  [1].   However, in the case of a sponsorship where there is a divorce or just a child involved, an additional requirement is needed, specifically, custody over the child.  This can be challenging as I wrote earlier.   

The situation is more difficult where a father or mother of a child immigrates to Canada before the child, the child often being in the custody of a grandparent or the other parent.  Aside from the need for custody in estranged relationships,  the phenomenon of the already immigrated parent not declaring the existence of the child when that parent obtained her permanent resident status,  may jeopardize the ability of that child from ever being sponsored under Regulation 117(9)(d) of the immigration refugee protection regulations.  

Further, the parent seeking to sponsor an undeclared child may be in jeopardy of having their own permanent  resident status removed on the  basis of  committing a material misrepresentation when they applied for their own permanent residency.  This may even affect those persons who are Canadian citizens who fail to declare a dependent child.

There are remedies such as humanitarian and compassionate submissions in an application for permanent residence to sponsor a child. Such submissions would have to address whether it is in the best interests for a child to be in Canada despite failing to be considered as a member of the family class.  

Such humanitarian and compassionate applications are not ‘slam-dunks’ in terms of the chances of success.  There must be credible evidence (usually from professionally-credentialed third parties). that speaks to what is in the best interests of a child.  There also should be some expression of why the current separation of the child from the parent in Canada cannot be maintained. The Canadian-based parent’s circumstances are relevant.  Such circumstances include the financial circumstances of the Canadian-based parent.

It is not sufficient to show that Canada has better opportunities for children seeking to  obtain permanent status in Canada.   Similarly, the presence of family members in the country where the child resides may lead an officer to ask about whether the existing persons who care for the child are able to safeguard  the best interests of the child.

The situation where a child has had visitor status in Canada for a number of months and is with the Canadian parent due to an interim custody order is different.  If said child has been under the care of the Canadian-based parent for a long time, then more evidence could possibly be obtained such as the school marks, testimonials from teachers and neighbors, and reports from medical professionals. Such evidence would presumably, show that it is in the best interests of the child to remain in Canada.

Seeking advice on bringing a child to Canada permanently?  Need Immigration advice? Contact the Chaudhary Law Office

[1] Please note that the link which refers to the age of dependent children being under 19 shall be subject to changes which shall return the age of a dependent child to under age 22.  Those changes are slated to become effective on October 24 2017 as per  http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2017/2017-05-03/html/sor-dors60-eng.php

Canada Border Service Agency – Greater Toronto Enforcement Centre

By Author: Admin | May 1, 2017

Canada Border Service Agency – The Greater Toronto Enforcement Centre (GTEC)

A Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) logo is seen on a worker

A base of operations for the Canada Border Service Agency is The Greater Toronto Enforcement Centre (GTEC), located at 6900 Airport Road, Mississauga Ontario.  GTEC’s public area is like a subway station in a large urban centre.  There are Advertisements in the form of Cable Pulse 24 emanating from two flat screen televisions.  There is an ethnically  diverse group of people, many signs directing one to wheel chair accessibility, a device that disseminates a ticket (required to see an enforcement officer), and the persons  waiting are understandably glum.    The seats are durable and uncomfortable, some having that ability to impress a waffle pattern onto your body.  There is an escalator at one part of the  public area as well (the back entrance).

Some officers wear uniforms and others do not.  You speak to an officer through glass containing a metallic circle that allows the officer to hear you despite the presence of the surrounding wall of glass, as is similar to a transit worker at a subway station’s entrance.  I recall the level of formality being much lower than in the late 1990s.  At that time, I was able to view a CBSA file in the area reserved for officers, and  use the CBSA’s internal photocopier.  That level of formality subsequently changed.

Like a subway station, GTEC can be a starting point for you to be taken away to a different destination.  In some cases you may be taken to be detained temporarily at 385 Rexdale Boulevard, or other institutions.   In other cases, you may be detained and then removed from Canada.

Other interactions may be relatively innocuous, such as when you are instructed to report to a CBSA officer periodically in person, once or twice a month.  Reporting also takes place at an alternative CBSA office, located at 74 Victoria Street, 10th floor.  Other meetings may be convoked to offer  a Pre Removal Risk Assessment, or to update a residential address, or to provide information regarding  passports or other government documents like birth certificates.

Cooperation with CBSA officers is essential where individuals are instructed to facilitate their removal from Canada.  The failure to demonstrate cooperation with the CBSA may lead to detention.  If there an individual is summoned to GTEC and is not conversant in one of Canada’s official languages, then an interpreter should accompany the individual.

The meeting rooms are meant to accommodate two persons plus an officer and are quite small.  The sound insulation is such that persons who have meeting In adjacent rooms can sometimes hear eachother.  There is something of an overflow sections where privacy is even more sparse, where unrelated clients have discussions with officers separated by a burgundy curtain.

If you have an invitation to meet a CBSA officer at GTEC, you may wish to consult our office about that invitation and what may occur at GTEC.

Claiming Refugee Protection from the Canada-US border

By Author: Admin | April 9, 2017

Are you contemplating claiming Refugee Protection from the Canada-USA border?

Refugee-claim-canada-us-safe-third-country-agreement-chuahdary-law

Since the November 2016 election in the United States of America (USA) we have seen an increase of calls from people in the United States who wish to claim Refugee Protection also known as seeking Asylum by crossing the Canada-USA border. Although, it is possible to claim protection from within Canada, the Safe Third Country Agreement might prevent these claimants from entering the country and to be able to claim Refugee Protection.

What is the Safe third country agreement?

This Agreement is between the government of Canada and the United States and came into force in 2004, under the agreement, refugee and asylum seekers are required to claim protection in the first safe country they arrive in, unless one of the exemptions of the Agreement applies to them. This Agreement does not apply to US citizens as well as habitual residents of the US who are stateless (citizens of no country).

The Agreement applies to claimants who are coming to Canada from the US by using the land border crossing, train and airport. In the case of airports it only applies if the person seeking refugee protection in Canada has been refused refugee status in the U.S. and is in transit through Canada after being deported from the U.S.

What are the exceptions?

There are four exceptions:

  1. You have a family member in Canada, The Family member exception
  2. Minor’s who are alone, Unaccompanied minors exception
  3. Canadian travel document holder, Document holder exceptions
  4. Public Interest exceptions

1. The Family Member Exception

This Exception applies if the Refugee claimant has a family member in Canada who is either a permanent resident of Canada, a Canadian Citizen of Canada, a protected person in Canada, has made a claim for refugee status in Canada that has been referred to the IRB, has had his or her removal order stayed on humanitarian and compassionate grounds, holds a valid Canadian work permit or holds a valid Canadian study permit.

A Family member is defined in the Agreement as a spouse, legal guardian, child, father or mother, sister or brother, grandfather or grandmother, grandchild, uncle or aunt, nephew or niece, common-law partner, same-sex spouse.

If you have a family member as defined by the Agreement and has one of the statuses mentioned above, the exception could apply to your case.

2. Unaccompanied Minors Exception

Children under 18 who are unaccompanied by their legal guardians including mother or father, are not married or in a common-law relationship and who do not have a legal guardian in Canada or the United States may qualify under this category.

3. Travel Document Holder Exception

A person who hold a valid Canadian visa (other than a transit visa), a valid work permit, a study permit, a travel document (for permanent residents or refugees) or other valid admission document issued by Canada, or who are not required (exempt) to get a temporary resident visa to enter Canada but require a U.S.–issued visa to enter the U.S may qualify under this category and could have a claim for refugee protection.

4. Public Interest Exception

If a person has been charged with or convicted of an offence that could subject them to the death penalty in the U.S. or in a third country. However, the person is ineligible if he or she has been found inadmissible in Canada on the grounds of security, for violating human or international rights, or for serious criminality, or if the Minister finds the person to be a danger to the public.

Conclusion

Even if a person qualifies for one of these exceptions of the Safe Third Country Agreement, refugee claimants must still meet all other eligibility criteria of Canada’s immigration Law and Regulations such as inadmissibility.

For more information about Refugee Claims and the Canada-Us Safe Third country Agreement visit Citizenship and Immigration Canada’s website.

If you need assistance or more information call the Chaudhary Law Office for a consultation.

Thank you to our Followers

The Chaudhary Law Office’s Blog was selected by Feedspot as one of the Top 60 Immigration Blogs on the web.

We thank Feedspot and our followers for having nominated us.

Anyone Can Be A Representative under Canada’s Immigration Website

By Author: Admin | March 27, 2017

Anyone Can Be A Representative under Canada’s Immigration Website

CANADIAN_IMMIGRATION_LAWYER_CHAUDAHRY_LAW_OFFICE_REPRESENTATIVE_CIC

I’ve written about the Canadian government’s somewhat sinister  view of representatives in the past .

More recently however, government websites attempt to convey information in a dispassionate manner, without favoritism or bias towards or against any group.  The official website of Canada’s immigration department (“www.CIC.GC.CA” or “CIC”), takes this ecumenical view of representatives with much enthusiasm.

Representatives are typically lawyers or immigration consultants.  However, according to  CIC,  representatives may also include, “ family members friends and other third parties “  One can see that from the point of view of CIC, the breadth of representatives  encompasses persons who possess no specialized expertise  or specialized training.  Further CIC asserts, you can entrust your immigration matters not only to a trusted family member or friend, but even to “other third parties”  – Other third parties is so broad a category as to potentially capture anyone.  In other words, anyone can be a representative.

According to CIC,  there are good Samaritans who will even be your representative and charge you no money: “They may give the same services as paid representatives, but they do it for free.”  This calls to mind the case where an unlicensed consultant was allegedly providing free services .  In that case, the Immigration Refugee Board stated, “Either Dr. Ehikwe earns a living doing non-immigration matters and is altruistic to a fault or he is attempting to circumvent section 13.1 of the IRP Regulations.”

The scope of services you may avail yourself of  are described in some detail where the official website for IRCC states,

Others who may help you apply

Some people may help you with other parts of the application process. These people do not need to act as your representative or access your personal information.

For example, someone may help you:

  • use this website to find information [Emphasis Added]
  • access a computer, scanner or printer
  • navigate our e-services
  • view and use electronic forms or to download/upload documents
  • get your documents translated
  • make travel plans or
  • choose and register in courses to study in Canada

The above bullet points when read together  summarize most of  the tasks an unlicenced advisor carries out when  giving advice to someone about Canadian immigration.   The phrase, “use this website to find information” begs the question: to find information about what?  And For what purpose?  The only reason  one would check the CIC website for anything other than to obtain information citizenship or immigration matters would be to obtain advice and guidance about Canada’s immigration programs.

Taken as a whole the above section of the CIC website constitute an invitation to be either self-victimized by self-filing a complex visa application, or an invitation to be victimized by  an unlicensed consultant who is advising applicants apparently for free.  Such unlicensed individuals typically suffer no consequences for providing improper advice.

An Alternative Dispute Resolution at the Immigration Refugee Board – Withdraw?

By Author: Admin | March 13, 2017

An Alternative Dispute Resolution at the Immigration Refugee Board – Withdraw?

ADR picture

The Immigration Refugee Board  Appeal Division (or IAD) offers an Alternative Dispute Resolution in addition to a hearing.  An ADR is  offered to those cases of  refused spousal and sometimes, refused parent cases where the issues seem straightforward.  Straightforward cases are often characterized by only one issue, that is not related to admissibility.

Some sophisticated clients of the immigration department file their own applications and some also attend the ADR session without representation.  Such clients are perhaps emboldened by the Immigration Refugee Board  website which states,   counsel can be any person, including a trusted friend or community member.  I have trusted friends who are good with computers, but wouldn’t want them representing me at an immigration tribunal who can decide that my spouse may  never be able to live with me in Canada.  Similarly, the reference to “community member” is an invitation for persons within an ethnic group to be exploited by others within the same ethnic group;  usually those within the same group with more advanced English or French language skills can wrongfully state  to the IAD that they are not collecting a fee for their representation.   The recourse for incompetent advice from such persons is minimal.

Self-represented cases at the ADR stage often lead to disappointment because of the lack of preparation; such self-represented candidates have a strong conviction that their marriage is real, or that their income is sufficient to support their parents but often lack the experience to configure sufficient evidence in an appropriately clear and compelling manner.   Similarly, such self-represented candidates have not been given instruction as to how to best present their oral responses at the interview.

Withdrawing an appeal after an unsuccessful Alternative Dispute Resolution (“ADR” is one possible course of action.  The other one is to continue onward with a full hearing.  The option of proceeding with a full hearing can be the logical choice, particularly if the option of re-filing an application may lead to a refusal.  Refiling an application is  not suitable if the  visa office would simply refuse a re-filed application, thus compelling you to proceed to the IAD for a second time.  Sometimes visa offices treat re-filed applications like refried beans, without a strong presentation of relevant, and new  facts.

On the other hand proceeding to a full hearing constitutes a last chance in terms of having an appeal at the IAD; generally speaking after the IAD refuses a case, it cannot hear it again unless there are significant changes in the facts of the case.  If you’re at the crossroads of what to do after a refused ADR, or have just received a refusal of your spouse’s  or parent’s case, contact Chaudhary Law Office.

Citizenship and Immigration Canada’s update’s its Sponsorship of Parents and Grandparents for 2017

By Author: Admin | December 22, 2016

Citizenship and Immigration Canada’s update’s its Sponsorship of Parents and Grandparents for 2017

Parental sponsorship CIC

As the new year is approaching, Citizenship and Immigration Canada announced on December 14, 2016:

“The Government is committed to a fair and transparent immigration system. Changes made to the Parent and Grandparent Program will improve access to the application process, given that the number of applications accepted for intake is limited. In order to give the same chance to all Canadians who are interested in applying to sponsor their parents or grandparents, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) heard former applicants and is making changes to improve how people can apply to this program.

Between January 3 and February 2, 2017, Canadian citizens and permanent residents who want to apply as sponsors must first complete an online form on the IRCC website to let the Department know they are interested in applying to sponsor their parents or grandparents.

The online form will be available for 30 days, from noon Eastern Standard Time (EST) on January 3, 2017, to noon EST on February 2, 2017.

The form will ask for the individual’s first name, family name, date of birth, country of birth, main home address, postal code and email address. Once the information is successfully submitted through the online form, the individual will get a confirmation number. They should keep this number for their records. They will need to submit only one online form, as duplicate entries will be removed. Completing the form will not mean a person has applied to sponsor under the program.

At the end of the 30 days, IRCC will remove the duplicates, randomly choose 10 000 people and ask them to complete the full application. IRCC will let everyone who completed an online form know whether they were chosen or not. Only those who were randomly chosen will be invited to apply to the Parent and Grandparent Program.

Those who were invited to apply will have 90 days to submit their complete application to IRCC. The 2017 application kit and guide will be available on IRCC’s website on January 9, 2017.

Interested sponsors who are not selected will be able to indicate their interest to apply again in 2018.”

The updated parents and grandparent’s sponsorship program brings significant changes. Most notable is the fact that between January 3 and February 2, 2017, Canadian citizens and permanent residents who want to apply as sponsors for their parents and grandparents must first complete an online form to let the Department know they are interested in applying to sponsor their parents or grandparents. CIC will then randomly select 10 000 applicants and invite them to apply for the Program.

Seeing that only 10 000 candidates will be selected for 2017 there is an alternative to the parents and grandparents sponsorship program if you wish for your parents and/or grandparents to come to Canada and that is an application for a Super Visa which will allow for parents and grandparents of a Canadian citizen or permanent resident to remain in Canada for 2 years at a time without having to renew their status.

See who is eligible for the super visa.

If you would like to discuss parent and grandparent sponsorship program, super visas or any Canadian Immigration law matter, please contact the Chaudhary Law Office.

Removal Orders in the Canadian Immigration Law Context

By Author: Admin | December 14, 2016

Removal Orders in the Canadian Immigration Law Context

removal_orders_chaudhary_law_immigration_canada

Definitions and overview

A foreign National and a permanent Resident can be determined to be inadmissible on several grounds including staying in Canada beyond their authorized period of stay (expired visa or permit). Citizenship and Immigration Canada has a list of inadmissibility categories on their website which are:

  • security reasons, including
    • espionage
    • subversion (attempts to overthrow a government, etc.)
    • violence or terrorism, or
    • membership in an organization involved in any of these
  • human or international rights violations, including
    • war crimes
    • crimes against humanity
    • being a senior official in a government engaged in gross human rights violations or subject to international sanctions
  • committing a serious crime that would be punishable by a maximum prison term of at least 10 years in Canada
  • having been convicted of a crime, including driving while under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
  • organized crime, including membership in an organization that takes part in organized criminal activity, people smuggling or money laundering
  • health grounds – if their condition is likely to:
    • endanger public health or public safety, or
    • cause excessive demands on health or social services (some exceptions exist)
  • financial reasons – if they are unable or unwilling to support themselves and their family members
  • misrepresentation, which includes providing false information or withholding information directly related to decisions made under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA)
  • failure to comply with any provision of IRPAor
  • having an inadmissible family member.

A finding of inadmissibility of a permanent resident or Foreign National in the Canadian Immigration context often results with a removal order. Canada’s Immigration system is governed by the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act as well as the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations.

There are three types of removal orders which are departure orders, exclusion orders and deportation orders (Regulation 223 of the IRPR). It is important to note that departure and exclusion orders are reserved for less serious violations of the Immigration Law.

Departure Orders

A departure order is a document issued to a foreign national stating that the individual must leave Canada within 30 days of the order becoming enforceable. If the foreign national fails to leave Canada within that time frame, the departure order will become a deportation order which has serious consequences for returning to Canada. There are exceptions to the departure order becoming enforceable such as cases where the individual appeals a decision or is being detained.

If the individual complies with the departure order, they will not need an authorization to return to Canada whereas a deportation order will require an Authorization to return (see below for a brief overview on the Authorization to return application).

Exclusion Orders

When it comes to exclusion orders there exists two types: exclusion orders issued for a one-year period; and exclusion orders that carry a two-year bar from entering Canada. In cases of misrepresentation you may be barred from entering Canada for five years.

An exclusion order obliges the foreign national to obtain a written authorization in order to be able to return to Canada during the period of exclusion.

Deportation order

Deportation orders are issued in the cases of more serious violations of the Immigration Law of Canada.  As discussed above, departure orders can become deportation orders if the individual failed to comply with the order.

Once a deportation order is issued an Authorization to Return will be required to return to Canada.

Authorization to Return to Canada Application

If you have been the subject of a removal order from Canada you will probably need an Authorization to Return to Canada (ARC) if you want to return. Whether you need one depends on the type of removal order that was issued.

If you are applying for a visa or permit to come to Canada you must include all of the required documents with your application, including:

  • a Temporary Resident Visa
  • two passport size photographs taken within the last six months.
  • a copy of your passport.
  • a written letter (in English or French) explaining, in detail, the reasons you feel you should be allowed to return to Canada. The letter must be written in block letters in black ink or typed.
  • the processing fee

If your departure order became a deportation order because you did not leave Canada within 30 days of the date the departure order was issued, you must explain the reasons you did not leave Canada in the allotted amount of time.

If you are required to re-pay any costs related to your removal from Canada, you will be told the amount when your application is being processed.

If you must attend an interview or if additional documents are required, you will be notified in writing. You will also be notified in writing of the final decision in your case.

For more information about the authorization to return to Canada after a removal order is issued visit Citizenship and Immigration Canada’s website.

Conclusion

We have seen the three types of removal orders that are issued within the Canadian Immigration context. If you require assistance with any related immigration matter contact the Chaudhary Law Office.

*Relevant legislative sections: section 42, 52 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and Regulation 223 to 243 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations.

 

New Graphic
New Comers Guide To Canada

Our strict privacy policy keeps your email address 100% safe & secure.

I was born and raised in Toronto, Ontario Canada. I am an accomplished author and lecturer and am consulted by the media and other immigration lawyers and consultants on immigration matters and challenging immigration cases, appeals, and federal court matters.

Please call me for any Canadian immigration issues or concerns you may have: 416-447-6118

Read more about Chaudhary Law Office on Google places, Twitter, and Linkedin.

For Immediate Immigration Help,
Call Us Now
416-447-6118

Contact Information

Chaudhary Law Office
18 Wynford Drive Suite 707, Toronto
Ontario , M3C 3S2 Canada
Phone: 416-447- 6118
Fax: 416-447-6746

Client Testimonials


Salam Max

MY spouse [xxxxxx] has received her passport back with the immigrant Visa and landing papers and other related doxs. All of the dox are attatched for your references. congratulations and Thanks Thanks Thanks

-Hamid



Hello again Max

I just wanted to thank you again for your exertions yesterday and for all your preparation leading up to the hearing. I felt that I was well represented and that you articulated the issues and the argument for my case very clearly. Look forward to hearing from the judge next. Hope you are feeling better today,

-Anne Marie


Read More