Stewart Sharma Harsanyi Immigration Law Firm Blog

Letter of Invitation/Support

If you are looking to invite someone (certain countries) there is a requirement for a letter of invitation/support. In many cases (including India,Pakistan and Lebanon) the visa officers are requiring the letter of invitation to be notarized. These are the bar minimums – the application may benefit from a review by an experienced immigration practitioner. Your letter must include the following information about the person being invited: Complete name. Date of birth. The person’s address and telephone number. Your relationship to the person being invited. The purpose of the trip. How long the person you are inviting intends to stay in Canada. Details on accommodation and living expenses. The date the person you are inviting intends to leave Canada. Your letter must also include the following information about yourself: Complete name. Date of birth. Address and telephone number in Canada. Occupation. Whether you are a Canadian citizen or Permanent Resident A photocopy of a document proving your status in Canada. For instance, a Canadian birth certificate if you were born in Canadaor a Canadian citizenship card if you are a naturalized citizen. If you are Permanent Resident, you must send proof of your permanent resident status (a copy of your... Read more →

Overcoming Residency Breaches

Immigration lawyer Gregory Willoughby has written an article canvassing 'solutions' to breaches of the residency obligation. IRPA creates a positive obligation on all permanent residents to comply with a residency requirement (approx. 2 years out of 5). Much better than the previous 6 months out a year requirement. Link to the full text/PDF article is here. A finding of inadmissibility by an immigration officer due to a breach of the residency requirement can be 'cured' by an appeal of that decision to the Immigration Appeal Division. The IAD has jurisdiction to consider 'humanitarian and compassionate' considerations (in other words, they can allow an appeal even if the immigration officer's decision is correct in law). The author argues that a 'stay of removal' is an underutilized option, the IAD usually allowing an appeal or dismissing it. Read more →

Oath of commitment

In a letter published in the National Post today, Martin Collacott has elaborated on the 'commitment' proposed of new immigrants. In a nutshell he proposes stripping citizenship from Canadians found in opposition to 'Canadian values' - specifically involvement or support for terrorism. Collacott also seems to support stripping citizenship for serious criminal activity. I'm not sure how this would be implemented. At a minimum, it would create two classes of citizens - those born here and naturalized Canadians. Read more →

Strategic Counsel - Poll of Canadian's view on immigration

The Strategic Counsel provided a study on Canadian's views on (inter alia) immigration. The study/poll was conducted in August 2005 and results have been published - PDF here. The summary with respect to the topic of immigration is interesting for a number of reasons: The plurality of the population believes that Canada accepts theright number of immigrants (46%). By a ratio of 2.5:1 however, the remainder hold that Canada accepts too many rather than too few immigrants. Among those who believe that contribution is linked to country of origin, a majority feel that European immigrants (76%) and to a somewhat lesser extent Asians (59%), make a positive contribution to the country. Less than half feel the same way about Indian (45%) and West Indian (33%) arrivals. Quebecers hold a significantly more positive assessment of the contribution made by Caribbean and West Indian immigrants (46% vs28% in the ROC). Most Canadians (69%), and especially residents of Quebec (85%), are of the view that immigrants should be encouraged to integrate and become part of the broader society rather than maintain their ethnic identity and culture. Taken together, these findings suggest that immigration continues to be a "sub-surface" issue. It has very low... Read more →

Sponsorship Agreements and Divorce

A recent decision by the Ontario Superior Court indicates that immigration sponsorships will be "highly relevant" for divorce litigation/proceedings. An article canvassing the decision was written by Cristin Schmitz for the publication "The Lawyer's Weekly" in Vol. 25, No. 33 January 13, 2006 edition. The article noted that a Canadian sponsored his wife's immigration, but 'left' her 15 months after their arranged marriage must pay for her re-education in Canada. The sponsor was ordered to pay his wife $3,200/month until she completes her studies for an undergraduate business degree from Ryerson university. That could amount to 6 years of support (highly unusual for such a brief marriage). Sponsorship agreements bind the sponsor to fulfill certain financial guarantees. In the case of spouses, this agreement's term is 3 years (previously 10 years). The spousal 'award' far exceeds the new spousal support guidelines. The sponsor's consel advised "Family law lawyers would be best to consult with immigration specialists, and would b ebest to create a very fair and reasonable scenario for the relevant spouse before litigating." Perhaps an element of 'fault' was considered by the court (although not mentioned in the decision). This issue is currently being considered by the Supreme Court... Read more →