English 
Français 
Español 
العربية 
Português 
Русский 
עברית 
Last Updated on August 29, 2016
The Guidelines in Case the Applicant is Inadmissible
The authorities might grant exemptions to applicants for overcoming inadmissibility. As such, the applicants and their family members would need to have no other inadmissibilities at the time of the final decision. In some cases, the officers might discover other inadmissibilities at Stage 2. In this scenario, they would need to check whether any Humanitarian and Compassionate (H&C) factors outweigh these inadmissibilities. If the officers find that various Humanitarian and Compassionate (H&C) factors still do not outweigh the inadmissibilities, the officers would need to refuse the application for permanent residence. The only exception to this situation occurs when the officers decide to grant exemptions:
- On the Minister’s initiative or,
- At the request of the applicant
In such cases, the officers would need to:
- Make the final decision
- Send the refusal letters (in case of refusal) and,
- Prepare the A44 (1) reports and send it to the Minister’s delegate with a recommendation (when applicable)
It is worth highlighting that the authorities must not refuse applicants at Stage 2 merely because they are inadmissible for being out of status. This is in accordance with the provisions specified in A41.
Situations could arise where the officers come across outstanding Pre-Removal Risk Assessments (PRRAs). In this scenario, they would need to inform the offices holding the Pre-Removal Risk Assessments (PRRAs) of the Humanitarian and Compassionate (H&C) refusal.
Other Situations – The Guidelines for Withdrawing an Application
Situations could arise where some applicants wish to withdraw their applications for Humanitarian and Compassionate (H&C) consideration. In this scenario, these applicants would need to convey their desire in writing. They would need to send letters that confirm the withdrawal request.
Communicating with Applicants – For Obtaining Further Information from the Applicant
The applicants bear the entire responsibility for providing all necessary information at the time of their initial application. As such, if any new information comes to light, the applicants would need to notify this to Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC). In case the authorities require any further details from the applicants, they would need to send letters to the applicants.
Communicating with Applicants – In Cases Where the Authorities Receive the Requested Information After the Specified Period of Time
Situations could arise where the applicant’s submission arrives after the specified period of time for responding to the request for further information has elapsed. In this scenario, the officers would need to follow the guidelines tabulated below.
| When a Submission Arrives Late and… | Then, the officers would need to… |
| The officers have already sent the refusal letter to the applicant
i.e. the authorities have already made the assessment on the basis of the information on file and the decision was negative |
Inform the applicant that the authorities had provided a specified period of time for the response and that this time elapsed with no submissions received. As a result, the authorities made the decision based entirely on the information on file.
The officers could reconsider a decision (refer to Appendix A) if they feel that the submission contains significant information that could have a crucial impact on the original decision. However, they would need to do this if, in their view, they received this submission within a reasonable period of time after the final decision. |
| The authorities have not made a decision as yet | Base their decision on all available information. This includes considering the late submissions the applicant has made. As such, the applicant would face no penalty. |
Communicating with Applicants – In Cases of Loss of Contact with the Applicant
The officers would need to document any attempts they may make for communicating with the client. In addition, they would need to document any attempts for verifying the applicant’s current address as well. Situations could arise where the correspondence sent to the client comes back or where the applicant does not respond. In this scenario, the officers would need to check that they used the correct address. If applicable, they would need to verify that they copied the counsel as well. In most cases, the officers would need to process the applicant through to a decision i.e. an approval or a refusal. Officers will not be able to close applications unless the applicant formally withdraws it.
Communicating with Applicants – Dealing with Fraud or Misrepresentation
Situations could arise where misrepresentation or fraud related to a material fact has taken place. Or, it could be that the officers suspect that misrepresentation or fraud related to a material fact is about to occur. In this scenario, the officers would need to request written information from the client or even, schedule an interview. However, they would need to base their actions on the situation and the type of information required.
The table given below highlights these kinds of situations and the actions that the officers would need to take. Based on the actions taken, the officers would need to update the Global Case Management System (GCMS) notes accordingly.
|
When… |
Then… |
| It appears that the applicant used fraud or misrepresentation for obtaining a positive Stage 1 assessment | The officers would need to send a letter to the applicant:
|
| The officers receive no response from the applicant | The officers would need to:
|
| The applicant makes the relevant submissions | The officers would need to:
|
| A review of the submissions results in a finding of sufficient evidence of fraud or misrepresentation | The officers would need to send a letter informing the applicant that:
|
| The applicant submits information for consideration in an A44 (1) report recommendation | The officers would need to:
|
