From north of the 49th Parallel, our resident legal beagle sends along a case report -- H.S. v R.S., 2015 BCSC 1856 -- interesting for being an unusual example of the application of common sense to the ultra-liberal Canadian immigration "system". (Agent 3 asks, "Is dis a system?")
Mrs. R.S. and the Claimant, Dr. H.S., are both from Pakistan. (Their identities have been suppressed for reasons of privacy and political correctness. Walt wouldn't be surprised if their surname is "Singh".) Dr. H.S., a veterinary surgeon aged 53, came to Canada about 35 years ago and became a Canadian citizen. Mrs. R.S. is 40 years old, and a citizen of Pakistan, where she had what the judge called an "impressive résumé" of education and employment.
In his judgment, Mr. Justice Macintosh of the Supreme Court of British Columbia wrote that the parties were introduced through a mutual friend when Mrs. R.S. was living in Pakistan and Dr. H.S. was living and working in Victoria. Mrs. R.S. came to Canada on a visitor's visa. [Walt's emphasis] The couple married in Ontario on October 25, 2012, and married again in a religious ceremony in Pakistan.
In 2013, Mrs. R.S. moved to Canada, again on a visitor's visa, where the newlyweds lived in a house in Victoria which Dr. H.S. shared with his mother. Soon after Mrs. R.S. arrived the second time, her husband agreed to sponsor her as a permanent resident under Canada's "family reunification" programme.
Sadly (but predictably?) the marriage soon disintegrated amid allegations that the husband had been physically and emotionally abusive. And of course there was the mother-in-law problem. The S's supposedly separated in March 2014, by which time Mrs. R.S. was four months pregnant. However, it wasn't until May 2014 that her husband threw her out of the house.
"Dr. H.S. withdrew his (sponsorship) support almost the same day the couple separated," said the judge, noting that it isn’t clear if that was necessary. "He was duty bound to do so in the case of divorce, and he says in an affidavit that he was advised by a lawyer to do so in the case of separation."
However, the good doctor didn't bother to inform his wife about the change in her prospects for remaining in Canada. One can imagine her surprise on receiving a departure order from Canuck immigration officials in April 2014. She then tried the old dodge of making a refugee claim to stay in Canada, alleging that she was in danger from a former fiancé back in Pakistan, but, incredibly, her claim was rejected.
Mrs. R.S. was supposed to be leave "voluntarily" or be deported in September. In anticipation of having to leave Canada, she applied to the court for an order allowing her to take with her the couple's son, 13 months old at the time of the application. The boy has spent most of his short life in the care of his mother, although a court order allows the father visitation rights of up to 20 hours a week.
Mrs. S's application was resisted by Dr. H.S., but Mr. Justice Macintosh found that it would be in the child's best interests to be with his mother. "Mrs. R.S. is clearly A [the child]'s primary parent and primary caregiver, and always has been. She still nurses him five or six times a day. The geographic location for a 13‑month‑old infant is less important than which parent the infant is with."
Counsel for Dr. H.S. argued in court that Mrs. R.S. should have done more to try to remain in Canada, an argument which earned a sharp rebuke from the judge. "Perhaps instead of contacting Canadian Immigration to revoke the sponsorship application, virtually the same day he separated from his pregnant wife, Dr. H.S. should have worked with her and with Canadian Immigration toward keeping her in the country in order to keep his son here. He perhaps regrets now the chain of events his revocation caused."
So... Mrs. R.S. et fils are (or will be) off to Pakistan. Walt's agent would suggest to Dr. H.S. [if asked, which he hasn't been! Ed.] that he get a divorce right sharpish, so that he will be free to import another bride.
No comments:
Post a Comment