https://www.bellissimolawgroup.com/2017/11/detention-reviews-habeas-corpus-and-the-charter-navigating-a-new-evolving-legal-landscape.html/).

In recognition of the contributions of the Charter, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada held a special citizenship ceremony, where 37 new Canadian’s were invited to take their citizenship oath. There, the Honourable Ahmed Hussen, Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship stated the following:

37 years ago, nobody could have imagined how the Charter would shape Canada nearly four decades later. I believe the Charter is the most important law as it has shaped our identity as a nation and represents the values of its people. Canada is recognized around the world for its freedom and democracy and Canadians are renowned for celebrating diversity and making everyone feel welcomed and included. To today’s 37 new Canadians: Welcome into our Canadian family, welcome home.[4]

We look forward to continued progress in Canadian immigration law and policy as it aligns with the principles and values of Canadian society as set out by the Charter.

Sources

The post 37 Years Later: The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms first appeared on Bellissimo Law Group.

To be eligible for an open work permit under the pilot, you must be living in Canada and be sponsored under the spouse or common-law partner in Canada class by your spouse or partner. You must have valid temporary resident status (as a visitor, student or worker) and live at the same address as your sponsor.

Extension of this pilot project is a recognition that families’ integration outcomes are improved when applicants are able to work, provide for their families and contribute to the Canadian economy while waiting for their applications for permanent residence to be processed.

If you are submitting a new application, you may submit an application for work permit together with the sponsorship application, along with an application for permanent residence.

If you have already submitted an application for permanent residence but have not yet applied for an open work permit, you can submit application for work permit separately, along with appropriate fees.

If you were provided with a work permit under the initial pilot, you must apply for a work permit extension before your status in Canada lapses.

The post Work Permit Pilot Extended for in-Canada Family Class Spouses and Common-Law Partners first appeared on Bellissimo Law Group.

Some of the changes included:

1. Doubling the number of applications allowed for parents and grandparents to 10,000 each year.
2. Restoring the maximum age for dependents to 22 from 19, to allow more Canadians to bring their children to Canada.
3. Restored spouses immigrating to Canada receiving immediate permanent residency and repealing the then two-year waiting period.
4. Work permit pilot project for eligible in Canada spousal applicants.
5. One-year processing times for spousal and common law sponsorship applications.
6. Effective June 6th 2017 15 points additional points were awarded for candidates with Canadian citizen or permanent resident siblings in Canada under the Express Entry system.
7. Additional funding for family class processing.
8. Removal of distinctions between in-Canada and Family Class sponsorship application forms.

Given the above there is little question that family reunification has been prioritized but as we enter an election year some of the familiar refrains will likely reappear including:

1. Reducing the numbers of admissions in the family class was seen as a way to alleviate some pressure on our already burdened system and prioritize economic classes.
2. Parents and grandparents immigrating to Canada are predominately elderly and will not assume employment in Canada and present with excessive medical costs.
3. Canada long did away with the inclusion of siblings with a few exceptions in the family class for example, because selection was based primarily on relation rather than on potential economic benefit. More emphasis on economic categories has benefited Canada and this could not have been accomplished through family class migration.

What did not change though, is that there remains no direct sponsorship of brothers and sisters. Those who advocate in favour of an expanded rather than limited family class especially as it relates to parents and grandparents argue the financial, social and emotional support that family members provide is vital to the sponsor’s ability to integrate successfully into Canadian society. Elderly relatives or children who need to be cared for would benefit by this care coming from a relative as opposed to a social or private service, and this would result in less of a burden on our stretched social resources and services.

In my view and I have advocated for this change for a number of years, is that we must continue to closely and carefully study the social as well as economic fusion and functionality across all categories. In that the family class need not only be thought of as a non-economic category and economic migration as a category that does not impact our nation building.

Family reunification has always been one of Canada’s objectives for immigration, especially since family reunification is seen as a “factor in promoting newcomer integration” and long-term settlement. In an immigration-friendly country like Canada we are increasing the number of immigrants entering into the country yearly so does it make sense to restrict the sponsorship of siblings, which, after all, are considered members of an immediate, and not extended, family?

Prior to the early 90’s, siblings were able to be directly sponsored under the family class. The Immigration Act of 1985 and the 1978 Regulations allowed for a much broader definition of admissible family members under the family class, which included siblings and most other relatives. This changed even though the family reunification objective under the law did not. The ultimate goal of such initiatives is to test and deliver an immigration program that has been carefully defined and debated. So, the Liberals have gone a long way in restoring family reunification and restoring siblings to a more prominent role in the immigration landscape should be next. Happy 2019 everyone!

(Sources)

The post Liberals Unveiled a New Plan for Immigration Focused on Family Reunification, Middle Class Growth in 2015 – How Is It Working in 2019? first appeared on Bellissimo Law Group.

The post This Week’s Success Story: Couple Reunited After Years in Limbo! first appeared on Bellissimo Law Group.

In Lim v. Canada, the Applicant challenged both the deemed abandonment and refusal to reopen her citizenship application after allegedly failing to respond to a letter by a Citizenship Official in April 2015.

After a letter purportedly sent by the Official did not receive a response, the citizenship application was deemed abandoned and closed. Despite the Applicant arguing that she had not received the letter, the Official refused to reopen the application, writing that abandoned applications are only reactivated if there was an administrative error on the part of a citizenship official.

In addition, the court found that there was no proof that the Applicant had been sent the April 2015 letter, and further that she had demonstrated a history of responding promptly to communications regarding her application. Finding that the letter had not been sent, the application for judicial review was granted on this ground alone.

Interestingly, the court also granted review of the decision to refuse to reopen the application, finding that the Respondent’s policy of reopening an application only upon administrative error by an official was arbitrary, unfair, and lacked common sense:

“The only basis upon which a case would be re-opened is if the department deemed themselves to be in error. That ground takes no account of other factors such as Acts of God, unforeseen circumstances and matters beyond anyone’s control. It is a self-serving and ludicrous basis from which to reject a re-opening request and is hence arbitrary.”

For more information on Canadian Citizenship, please click here.

(Sources)

The post A Dash of Common Sense for Government Communication Policy: Lim v. Canada 2016 FC 217 first appeared on Bellissimo Law Group.