Spousal sponsorship appeals before the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) often turn on accusations of “bad faith” marriages, where the government questions whether a relationship is genuine or was entered into primarily to gain immigration status. These cases can be complex, placing the burden squarely on the appellant to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that neither prong of bad faith applies. Success hinges on knowing the facts inside out, preparing your client thoroughly, and understanding the legal principles at play to weave a compelling case. This article explores the legal framework, distills key lessons from court rulings, and offers a structured approach to preparation, emphasizing that meticulous groundwork is the foundation of a strong appeal.
There are some occasions where it's better to simply re-file a spousal sponsorship application (particularly where validity concerns can be overcome) and if this is at issue it is imperative to consult with experienced counsel.
Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, a relationship is deemed bad faith if it was primarily intended to secure immigration benefits or if it lacks genuineness. When a sponsorship application is refused on these grounds, the sponsor can appeal to the IAD, tasked with showing that the relationship is both genuine and not driven by immigration motives. The IAD evaluates evidence holistically, considering factors such as the length of the relationship before marriage, compatibility in age or interests, the relationship’s development, communication and visits, mutual knowledge, and any prior marriages or sponsorships. These are flexible guidelines, not rigid requirements, tailored to each couple’s circumstances. The IAD assesses the marriage’s purpose at the time it was entered into, relying heavily on the couple’s testimony about their intentions, while genuineness is judged at the time of the appeal, often supported by evidence of shared commitments, though such proof is not conclusive.
Remember -there is no appeal to the IAD for a refusal on a Spouse or Common-Law Partner Class (In Canada).
Federal Court decisions (and decisions by the IAD itself) offer critical guidance for navigating these appeals. The IAD must avoid applying Western expectations of romance, particularly in arranged marriages, recognizing that cultural contexts shape relationships differently. Genuine partnerships can thrive without conventional displays of affection. Decisions must rest on evidence, not assumptions or stereotypes, ensuring the couple’s specific circumstances drive the analysis. Testimony from the couple is paramount, presumed credible unless the IAD provides clear, detailed reasons to question it; vague doubts about “rehearsed” answers are insufficient. The IAD must also adapt its approach to unique situations, such as disabilities, avoiding one-size-fits-all standards. Finally, a desire to immigrate is common and does not inherently signal bad faith; the focus should be on whether the relationship’s evolution makes sense in the couple’s lives, not on prior visa attempts.
The cornerstone of a successful appeal is preparation, which begins with a deep dive into the facts. Review the officer’s refusal letter and the appeal record meticulously, examining notes, interview details, and evidence to identify errors, overlooked proof, or fairness issues, such as inadequate opportunities to respond. This will help ensure that you understand the officer’s concerns, whether credibility gaps or selective reasoning, and helps you anticipate the Minister’s arguments. Thorough preparation prevents surprises and strengthens your ability to present a cohesive case that addresses both prongs of bad faith head-on.
Equally vital is preparing your client to tell their story effectively. The appellant’s testimony is central, as it directly speaks to the relationship’s purpose and genuineness. Meet with your client well before the hearing to review the entire record, ensuring they are familiar with every document and ready for tough questions. Address any credibility concerns upfront, rehearsing how to explain inconsistencies or weaknesses confidently. By empowering your client to testify clearly, you lay the foundation for a persuasive case that aligns with the legal standard of balance of probabilities.
Appellant's counsel will conduct a direct examination -which means no leading questions and prepare the sponsor/applicant for cross examination by Minister's Counsel -the distinction between the two must be crystal clear to the sponsor/applicant
Understanding the legal principles is critical to tying the case together. The IAD conducts a fresh review, allowing new evidence and the chance to correct errors in law, fact, or fairness. However, humanitarian considerations are off the table. Your strategy must weave the facts, your client’s testimony, and the legal principles into a narrative that proves the marriage was neither primarily for immigration purposes nor lacking genuineness. For example, highlight ongoing communication or shared responsibilities to show authenticity, while using testimony to confirm sincere intentions at the outset. This cohesive approach ensures every piece of evidence serves the goal of meeting the appellant’s burden.
Start with the end in mind. What do you need to establish? How does your evidence and the testimony you elicit build or support that the marriage/relationship is genuine and not entered into primarily for an immigration benefit?
Strategic case management builds on this preparation. Set clear expectations with your client, explaining the officer’s mistakes, your plan, and the realistic odds of success. This fosters trust and keeps them focused. If the IAD offers an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) conference, approach it as a critical opportunity. Under tightened timelines, you must submit evidence quickly, often within 60 days of receiving the Appeal Record. Come armed with strong proof, ready to challenge the refusal and prepare your client for questioning.
At the hearing, stay vigilant for fairness issues, such as unclear questioning or interpretation problems. Raise objections promptly, articulating your concerns professionally to preserve the record for potential court review. When selecting witnesses, ensure they offer direct, relevant support for the relationship’s authenticity, and prepare them for cross-examination to avoid unintended harm.
Generally speaking if the sponsor and applicant cannot establish that neither prong of the regulation apply and cannot establish the typical factors assessed a third party witness will not be able to do so. That being said, witnesses are sometimes crucial depending on the particular factual matrix.
In your final submissions, focus on the IAD member’s key concerns, presenting your strongest evidence and legal arguments concisely to reinforce that neither bad faith prong applies.
The IAD process rewards those who master the facts, ready their client, and align every element with the law’s demands. By preparing rigorously, you equip yourself to show, on a balance of probabilities, that the impugned relationship is genuine and not primarily driven by immigration motives.
Comments