Residency and Other Requirements

Overview

This assignment has two parts. In Part 1, you will analyze your clients' case and make notes explaining your reasoning in light of the relevant law and policy.In Part 2, you will record yourself giving advice to your client on citizenship matters, based on the notes you have made regarding your legal analysis of their case.

Case Study

You are retained to represent a common-law couple, Pam and Angela, with respect to Angela's application for Canadian citizenship.

Angela is a citizen of the United States and came to Canada as a student to pursue industrial engineering (with a specialization in papermaking) at Concordia University in 2016.

Pam is a Canadian who acquired citizenship by descent through her mother when she was born in Scranton, Pennsylvania. Her father is American and the family moved to Canada where Pam was raised. Pam is now an actress who frequently travels around the world for work but is based in Canada. In the last 5 years, she has spent half her time abroad.

The couple met while on vacation approximately 6 years ago and moved in together approximately 2 years ago in 2022.

Angela graduated from Concordia in May of 2020 and received a three-year Post-Graduation Work Permit (PGWP). After graduation, she moved back home with her parents in California while searching for a job. After some time searching, in February 2021, she was fortunate to be hired and moved back to Canada to begin a new job as an industrial engineer for Dunder Mifflin's new paper factory in Ontario.

In 2022, Angela applied for permanent residency (PR) through the Express Entry, Canadian Experience Class using a combination of points from her Canadian education and one year of Canadian work experience, as well as her young age and English language ability. Her application was granted, and she was landed as a PR in June 2022.

Angela moved into Pam's condo in 2022 and Pam continued to pay the mortgage as she earns considerably more income. They also opened a joint bank account during this time for shared expenses. Since the pandemic, Angela works mostly remotely in Toronto as the factory is in Port Elgin, Ontario and she does not have to be on site for most of her duties. She only occasionally attends the facility for specific reasons.

Prior to moving in with Pam, Angela resided with a family friend in Canada, who had a garden unit that was not being used. She never had a lease agreement.

Since Angela can work mostly remotely, she began accompanying Pam on many of her frequent trips for acting gigs abroad after they moved in together. Angela spoke to a lawyer who said this time abroad counts towards her residency requirement as she is accompanying her common-law partner who is a Canadian citizen. Before this, Angela had not left Canada for any vacations since starting her position with Dunder Mifflin.

In the two years after they moved in together, Angela approximates that she spent a total of 6 months overseas travelling with Pam.

In September 2024, Angela applied for her Canadian citizenship. Last week, she received a letter from IRCC stating that they have concerns regarding whether she meets her residency requirements. They have also included a residency questionnaire. Angela suspects there may be some discrepancies between the travel dates she provided and the travel history collected by CBSA. She estimated travel dates in her application as she misplaced some of her travel receipts and was not able to get copies from her airline.

IRCC has provided 30 days for a response and Angela has come to see you for advice as a RCIC. During the consultation, Angela also mentions that she and Pam are in the process of becoming parents through adoption in Thailand. Accordingly, they are wondering if their future child will be entitled to Canadian citizenship.

Key Questions

1. Do you believe Angela may have met the residency requirement for citizenship when she applied in September 2024?
   • You do not need precise dates or an exact answer but must detail your reasoning as to why she may or may not qualify and how you would advise her to proceed.
2. Identify the potential evidentiary hurdles Angela may face in demonstrating her required physical residency in Canada as part of the current or any future citizenship application and describe the types of evidence that you would recommend she obtain in order to demonstrate residence, should it be necessary.
3. What advice would you provide Angela regarding the potential citizenship status of a child she and Pam adopt abroad?
   • What criteria must be met for the adoption to be recognized for citizenship purposes?
   • May the child be limited by the first generation born abroad rule? Explain the possible impact the rule may have under both the current and incoming legislation, including whether the child is adopted prior to or after the coming into force of Bill C-71.
   • How will the timing of Angela's application for citizenship affect the citizenship pathways for their adopted child?

Instructions

Part 1Part 2Technical details for recordingAcademic Integrity and the Use of AI

For Part 1, you will analyze your client's case usingthe FILAC framework and make some written notes on your analysis. Then, in Part 2, you will use your notes as a basis for advising your client orally, and you will video record yourself doing this. The video is the main element for your grade.

As you begin to analyze your clients' case, use the FILAC framework to support your reasoning. Remember that the first three steps - F, I, and L - are iterative. It's hard to know what facts are legally relevant until you know something about the law in this area. Similarly, becoming familiar with the law will help you clearly articulate the legal issues that your clients face. (For a review of the legal reasoning process, seeFILAC: A Framework for Legal Reasoning).

Facts:As you read through the facts, keep the law nearby to help you identify what's legally relevant. Based on your understanding of the readings in this module, and on the new law you have learned pursuant to theCitizenship Act, try to identify the facts that you think may be legally relevant. As noted above, it is difficult to know what facts are legally relevant until you know something about what the law requires.

Issues:There are at least two legal issues implied in the questions presented to you at the end of the fact scenario. Extract the legal issues you see and articulate them using the "whether" structure described in your Blatt & Kurtz text (circa page 80). You may need to analyze each issue separately: keep in mind your clients' goals. As above, to articulate the legal issues, you will need a good grasp of the relevant law - including legislation and case law - as well as government policy. Be prepared to reread the key legislative provisions and key cases as articulate the issues.Note that some aspects of the questions presented go to different concerns - like whether your client is able to prove the truth of relevant facts using credible evidence.

Law:For each issue, identify the relevant legislation, case law, and/or policy. Review the Module 1 required readings for relevant law and policy.

Application and Conclusion:After thinking through your clients' situation, the facts, issues, and law, now apply the law to your client's facts so you can predict their current likelihood of success in achieving their goals - and what they could do to improve their chances of reaching their goals. This will form the basis for your advice to your clients in Part 2 of this assignment.

Submit Part 1 in a Word or PDF document. Cite any authorities you rely on in your reasoning (cases, legislation, policy) in accordance with theMcGill Guide.Show your work on each issue. That is, label your preliminary analysis: identify the issue (the "whether" statement); identify the law and facts that are relevant for that issue; apply the law to the facts; and state a conclusion on that issue. Part 1 will be assessed for the following competencies: foundational knowledge and legal research, critical thinking, and case management and communication.See the rubric for more details:Rubric - Case Study 1.

Point form is acceptable.Part 1 does not have to be full paragraphs or a detailed analysis. This written portion is meant to be the notes that outline your analysis of the issues pertaining to each question, ideally divided by sub-headings. Most importantly, the written portion should include the citations and legal support for the advice provided to the client in the video. Part 1 is essentially a written outline (with citations) of the advice that is expanded upon and provided in Part 2.