Oral Reasons for Decision [1] These are the oral reasons in the sponsorship appeal by SHAO QIN YU (the "appellant") from the refusal to approve the permanent resident visa application made by her husband, HAN YU ZHANG (the "applicant"), from China. [2] The application for a permanent resident visa was refused on December 2, 2008 pursuant to 12 (1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (the "IRPA"). The visa officer at the Immigration Section of the Canadian Consulate General in Hongkong was not satisfied that the marriage is genuine and that the primary reason for the marriage is other than for the purpose of gaining admission to Canada. [3] The appellant appeals the visa officer's refusal to issue the permanent resident visa. [4] The 40-year old appellant is from China. She landed in Canada on June 1, 2001. The 44-year old applicant is a citizen of China. [5] It is highly unusual for me in a sponsorship case to deliver oral reasons; however, I find the evidence that I have heard today rather exceptional and I will elaborate. [6] I will begin with saying that I am dismissing this appeal. The onus in an appeal in a section 4 claim is on you, ma'am. You must prove to me on a balance of probabilities that this was or is a genuine marriage. In order to do that you have to present evidence. The evidence that you have chosen to give to me is in the form of Exhibits A-1 and A-2. Exhibit A-1 is a letter dated July 6, 2009 and has a few months' phone bills for a select few months in 2008 and 2009. Indeed, the exhibit only begins in November 2008 and ends in May 2009 and, in totality, is four pages and four photos of you sitting at a computer which is Exhibit A-2. [7] What we are looking at when we are looking at the genuineness of the marriage are factors such as the intention of the parties to marry, the length of the relationship, the amount of time spent together, circumstances concerning the wedding, the level of knowledge of each other's relationship histories, continuing contact and communication after the marriage, financial provisions for each other, the level of sharing responsibility and care for the children, and the knowledge of each other's daily lives. Every case is of course unique so there may be other factors to look at. [8] I will begin with the application. Nowhere in the application did you state that you had any children, meaning in the sponsorship questionnaire. I find it unbelievable that your husband would say he did not know you were pregnant at the time you married, be it February or June, particularly in light of all the evidence that you gave about his uncle in Calgary who worked with your father arranging the meet because you were pregnant and in order to avoid what you called shame on your family and traditional Chinese custom. What his evidence says to me is that I have absolutely sufficient reason to doubt your credibility in respect of everything that subsequently come out of your mouth. [9] Now certainly throughout your testimony Minister's counsel was able to bring out many, many inconsistencies, but when we end run this thing, seven years after your date of marriage and your husband still does not know that you have a child with whom you were pregnant when you married him, that is the weightiest factor in my mind that this cannot possibly be a genuine marriage, even based on the very minimal evidence that you provided to me. You have not given me in Exhibit A-1 what your husband's phone number is and there are various phone numbers here to China. But you would think somewhere in these conversations, be it in 2008 or 2009, that you having a child would come up in the conversation. It is entirely implausible to have discussions on a daily, weekly or monthly basis of the nature that you are presenting to me and asking me to believe, to talk about your daily life with your husband and not to mention a child who must be omnipresent. [10] When I then asked you to describe your husband, and I specifically said I did not want to hear regular adjectives, like he works hard or he is nice, that is exactly what you gave me. You said to me he is a very simple and humble and he does not like to talk much. I then said, anything else? In response you said he is a very practical person; he cares about seniors and he likes to help people around him. I then said to you, anything else? you said, he works hard. I then said, anything else? and you said no. Again, it is implausible if this was a genuine marriage for you not to be able to say more about your husband in a meaningful way. You did not discuss his likes or his dislikes, which are pretty fundamental and basic in any relationship. Things as simple as his favourite colour, his favourite ice cream, his favourite television show, which would actually demonstrate that you know something about the person. Simple, not elaborate and please do not speak, I am delivering my reasons. Show some respect. But you were not able to do so, no matter how many opportunities I gave you. [11] In your submissions I again did not limit anything that you could say in any fashion and in your submissions the totality was in essence, I really want him here, but the case has been dragging on for so long so maybe the confusion arises from so long. I then asked you if you had anything else to say and you said nothing, meaning no, I have nothing further to say. I asked you if you were sure and you said yes. Again, you did not utilize the opportunity given, to give me any information which would in any way address the genuineness of the marriage to establish that you know anything remotely about your husband. [12] Therefore, based on the totality of the evidence, the written exhibits, the Minister's Record and your oral evidence, I really have no choice but to dismiss this appeal. [13] That is the end. Thank you. [Edited for grammar and syntax] Please send me summary of this case