- 主题发起人 sallylong
- 发布时间 2012-02-02
回复: 去了趟古巴，回来的时候被海关查了，吊销了移民身份，郁闷呀
[FONT=宋体]以下内容给楼主参考：[/FONT]
http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/eng/brdcom/references/legjur/iadsai/roaren/Pages/index.aspx
Removal Order Appeals Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
[FONT=宋体]驱逐令上诉移民和难民保护法[/FONT]
[FONT=宋体]其中的第三章部分[/FONT]Chapter3- Permanent Residence[FONT=宋体]中有这样几条可以注意一下：[/FONT]
p.7
Although the former Immigration Act also had a physical residency requirement, absence from Canada, even for an extended period of time, did not lead to a loss permanent resident status unless it was determined that the permanent resident had the intention to abandon Canada. Permanent residents who remained outside Canada for more than half of any 12-month period were deemed to have abandoned Canada as their place of permanent residence and the onus was on them to prove the contrary. Returning resident permits were, by statute, proof of a lack of intention to abandon Canada as a permanent residence. An adjudicator or an immigration officer determined whether or not the permanent resident had lost status as a result of an intention to abandon but the Immigration Act provided no corresponding ground of inadmissibility. The old case law under the Immigration Act regarding the intention to abandon is no longer relevant to appeals in law, as the IRPA has made the determination of compliance with the residency obligation, for most cases, a matter of simple arithmetic. However, the concept of abandonment is still relevant to the IAD’s exercise of humanitarian and compassionate discretion in residency obligation appeals.
[FONT=宋体]如果你不想放弃身份的话，请提供相关的证据证明你有不断返回加拿大的努力。[/FONT]
[FONT=宋体]另外，[/FONT]IAD[FONT=宋体]在裁决上诉时有人道主义和同情心的自由裁量权。[/FONT]
p.8
Basically, for at least 730 days (2 years) in every 5 year period,a permanent resident must be either physically present in Canada,or outside Canada in certain defined situations.
[FONT=宋体]这个是居住期限的要求，标明的是每五个五年期间，所以如果你的卡在今年[/FONT]2[FONT=宋体]月份到期的话，之后即使在这里居住（也就是等待上诉结果期间），是不能算在这五年的期间之内的。[/FONT]
p. 9-10
Although the method for calculating 730 days within a five-year period sounds straightforward, it can become complicated if the permanent resident is found to have breached the residency obligation more than once within a limited time. In one such case, the appellant, a minor, had not complied with his residency obligation. The officer however determined that humanitarian and compassionate considerations justified the breach and the appellant was allowed to return to Canada as a permanent resident. A few months later, he left Canada for a brief holiday. When he tried to return to Canada, another officer determined once again that the appellant was not in compliance with the residency obligation. His appeal to the IAD was allowed, but it was on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. The residency determination was found to be valid in law as the appellant had not met the 730-day requirement in the five-year period prior to the new determination. The appellant received no special treatment in calculating the period as result of the first officer’s decision.
[FONT=宋体]以上是一个真实的案例，有很多相似的地方，但这个案例的上诉人年纪小，所以只能做个参考。[/FONT]
Where an officer has determined that a permanent resident has not met the residency obligation, the officer may decide that the breach has been overcome if in the officer’s opinion, taking into account the best interests of a child directly affected by the determination, humanitarian and compassionate considerations justify the retention of permanent resident status.In addition, the IAD may allow an appeal on the basis of humanitarian and compassionate considerations.
[FONT=宋体]上诉的每个案子都有自己的独特之处，最终结果会综合考虑各种因素[/FONT]
The significance of factors considered in deciding whether equitable relief should be granted in residency obligation appeals naturally varies from case to case and some factors may overlap or need to be considered in conjunction with others. For example, an appellant who was absent from Canada for four years for a very good reason might present a more compelling case for equitable relief than another appellant who missed the residency obligation by only two months without any valid excuse. A non-exhaustive list of factors commonly considered includes the following：
[FONT=宋体]上诉的每个案子都有自己的独特之处，最终结果会综合考虑各种因素。要有一个合理的理由去解释你的上诉。以下理由会被考虑：[/FONT]
a.the extent of the non-compliance with the residency obligation
b.the reasons for the departure from Canada
c.the reasons for continued or lengthy stay abroad
h.the best interests of any children directly involved
[FONT=宋体]以下内容给楼主参考：[/FONT]
http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/eng/brdcom/references/legjur/iadsai/roaren/Pages/index.aspx
Removal Order Appeals Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
[FONT=宋体]驱逐令上诉移民和难民保护法[/FONT]
[FONT=宋体]其中的第三章部分[/FONT]Chapter3- Permanent Residence[FONT=宋体]中有这样几条可以注意一下：[/FONT]
p.7
Although the former Immigration Act also had a physical residency requirement, absence from Canada, even for an extended period of time, did not lead to a loss permanent resident status unless it was determined that the permanent resident had the intention to abandon Canada. Permanent residents who remained outside Canada for more than half of any 12-month period were deemed to have abandoned Canada as their place of permanent residence and the onus was on them to prove the contrary. Returning resident permits were, by statute, proof of a lack of intention to abandon Canada as a permanent residence. An adjudicator or an immigration officer determined whether or not the permanent resident had lost status as a result of an intention to abandon but the Immigration Act provided no corresponding ground of inadmissibility. The old case law under the Immigration Act regarding the intention to abandon is no longer relevant to appeals in law, as the IRPA has made the determination of compliance with the residency obligation, for most cases, a matter of simple arithmetic. However, the concept of abandonment is still relevant to the IAD’s exercise of humanitarian and compassionate discretion in residency obligation appeals.
[FONT=宋体]如果你不想放弃身份的话，请提供相关的证据证明你有不断返回加拿大的努力。[/FONT]
[FONT=宋体]另外，[/FONT]IAD[FONT=宋体]在裁决上诉时有人道主义和同情心的自由裁量权。[/FONT]
p.8
Basically, for at least 730 days (2 years) in every 5 year period,a permanent resident must be either physically present in Canada,or outside Canada in certain defined situations.
[FONT=宋体]这个是居住期限的要求，标明的是每五个五年期间，所以如果你的卡在今年[/FONT]2[FONT=宋体]月份到期的话，之后即使在这里居住（也就是等待上诉结果期间），是不能算在这五年的期间之内的。[/FONT]
p. 9-10
Although the method for calculating 730 days within a five-year period sounds straightforward, it can become complicated if the permanent resident is found to have breached the residency obligation more than once within a limited time. In one such case, the appellant, a minor, had not complied with his residency obligation. The officer however determined that humanitarian and compassionate considerations justified the breach and the appellant was allowed to return to Canada as a permanent resident. A few months later, he left Canada for a brief holiday. When he tried to return to Canada, another officer determined once again that the appellant was not in compliance with the residency obligation. His appeal to the IAD was allowed, but it was on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. The residency determination was found to be valid in law as the appellant had not met the 730-day requirement in the five-year period prior to the new determination. The appellant received no special treatment in calculating the period as result of the first officer’s decision.
[FONT=宋体]以上是一个真实的案例，有很多相似的地方，但这个案例的上诉人年纪小，所以只能做个参考。[/FONT]
Where an officer has determined that a permanent resident has not met the residency obligation, the officer may decide that the breach has been overcome if in the officer’s opinion, taking into account the best interests of a child directly affected by the determination, humanitarian and compassionate considerations justify the retention of permanent resident status.In addition, the IAD may allow an appeal on the basis of humanitarian and compassionate considerations.
[FONT=宋体]如果有孩子的话，会充分考虑孩子的利益，这也是基于人道主义和同情心的考虑[/FONT]
p.11 -12
Discretionary Relief in Residency Obligation Appeals
Discretionary Relief in Residency Obligation Appeals
[FONT=宋体]酌情救济居住义务的上诉[/FONT]
[FONT=宋体]上诉的每个案子都有自己的独特之处，最终结果会综合考虑各种因素[/FONT]
The significance of factors considered in deciding whether equitable relief should be granted in residency obligation appeals naturally varies from case to case and some factors may overlap or need to be considered in conjunction with others. For example, an appellant who was absent from Canada for four years for a very good reason might present a more compelling case for equitable relief than another appellant who missed the residency obligation by only two months without any valid excuse. A non-exhaustive list of factors commonly considered includes the following：
[FONT=宋体]上诉的每个案子都有自己的独特之处，最终结果会综合考虑各种因素。要有一个合理的理由去解释你的上诉。以下理由会被考虑：[/FONT]
a.the extent of the non-compliance with the residency obligation
b.the reasons for the departure from Canada
c.the reasons for continued or lengthy stay abroad
d.whether attempts to return to Canada were made at the first opportunity
e.the degree of establishment in Canada; both initial and continuing
f.family ties to Canada and whether they are sponsorable
g.hardship and dislocation that would be caused to the appellant and his/her family in Canada if the appellant were to be removed to his/her country of nationality
h.the best interests of any children directly involved
i.whether there are other unique or special circumstances that merit special relief
回复: 去了趟古巴，回来的时候被海关查了，吊销了移民身份，郁闷呀
赖先生有金弹，不也回去了吗。楼主若有那火力，还烦心上网跟什么呢。
赖先生有金弹，不也回去了吗。楼主若有那火力，还烦心上网跟什么呢。
回复: 去了趟古巴，回来的时候被海关查了，吊销了移民身份，郁闷呀
老赖，是不想在加拿大待啦，才回去的，你还真以为是中国的压力啊？
看看人家老赖，非法居留在温哥华，开妓院，和大圈帮勾结，倒卖毒品。 最后是警方，把什么外语都不会的 赖XX的狐朋狗友给抓啦，这家伙感觉没有什么意思，在这边生活，并得到中共当局的某种谅解，才回国的。 你看国内，最近，赖XX的事件，不是被和谐了，一波池水，赖回去，连个涟漪都没有起来。
他工作签证都拿下来啦。 英法语，那个都不懂，不是金蛋的作用吗?其实加拿大政府非常清楚，只要赖，老实在这里待着，可以待到死。 给工作签，就是这个意思。 可惜这家伙，本身就是个不正干的主儿，江山易改，本性难移啊，所以，移民局才又盯上他。
如赖XX一样请个律师团，移民局，立马傻眼，乖乖的称臣。请2个高级律师，这个小case，就能把加拿大当局给搞掂。
加拿大是个司法很不完善的国家，留下了各种各样的漏洞。 如果在欧洲，这早就被遣返啦。 移民局，有授权， 这边，为什么不被立刻遣返，或者立刻拘捕，关入，待遣返评估，拘留营？ 这些都是给有钱人时间，去运作的。 加拿大政府如果真想堵住这些漏洞， 能堵不住吗？ 但是堵住啦，专门吃这碗饭的律师们，中介们，就不干啦。 他们可是多位MP的金主啊。
老赖，是不想在加拿大待啦，才回去的，你还真以为是中国的压力啊？
看看人家老赖，非法居留在温哥华，开妓院，和大圈帮勾结，倒卖毒品。 最后是警方，把什么外语都不会的 赖XX的狐朋狗友给抓啦，这家伙感觉没有什么意思，在这边生活，并得到中共当局的某种谅解，才回国的。 你看国内，最近，赖XX的事件，不是被和谐了，一波池水，赖回去，连个涟漪都没有起来。
他工作签证都拿下来啦。 英法语，那个都不懂，不是金蛋的作用吗?其实加拿大政府非常清楚，只要赖，老实在这里待着，可以待到死。 给工作签，就是这个意思。 可惜这家伙，本身就是个不正干的主儿，江山易改，本性难移啊，所以，移民局才又盯上他。
如赖XX一样请个律师团，移民局，立马傻眼，乖乖的称臣。请2个高级律师，这个小case，就能把加拿大当局给搞掂。
加拿大是个司法很不完善的国家，留下了各种各样的漏洞。 如果在欧洲，这早就被遣返啦。 移民局，有授权， 这边，为什么不被立刻遣返，或者立刻拘捕，关入，待遣返评估，拘留营？ 这些都是给有钱人时间，去运作的。 加拿大政府如果真想堵住这些漏洞， 能堵不住吗？ 但是堵住啦，专门吃这碗饭的律师们，中介们，就不干啦。 他们可是多位MP的金主啊。
回复: 去了趟古巴，回来的时候被海关查了，吊销了移民身份，郁闷呀
作为加拿大永久居民，在政府官员面前，
你没有作假的权利，但是，
你有记不清楚的权利，你有听不懂话的权利，你有不认识字的权利，你有不会写字的权利，你有不会说话的权利，甚至，
你有直接拒绝回答问题的权利。
并且，你还不用怕得罪官员，因为你行使的上述权利是法律赋予你的，加拿大没有那个官员的权力比法律大。
只要你拥有永久居民身份，进入加拿大也是法律赋予你的权利，并且，拒绝回答有关居住状态的问题并不会影响你入境的权利。
作为加拿大永久居民，在政府官员面前，
你没有作假的权利，但是，
你有记不清楚的权利，你有听不懂话的权利，你有不认识字的权利，你有不会写字的权利，你有不会说话的权利，甚至，
你有直接拒绝回答问题的权利。
并且，你还不用怕得罪官员，因为你行使的上述权利是法律赋予你的，加拿大没有那个官员的权力比法律大。
只要你拥有永久居民身份，进入加拿大也是法律赋予你的权利，并且，拒绝回答有关居住状态的问题并不会影响你入境的权利。
Similar threads
- 超赞 赏
- ctzcy ,#197
- 2024-03-30
- 入籍，枫叶卡和移民监
2024-03-30有新回复
全楼:0.01
Bingoye
