Citizenship Flashcards
Rhodri came to Canada as a refugee from Guyana on January 1, 2014. His daughter, Jemma, was born in December 2014. On January 1, 2015, he was granted refugee protection by the RPD. On January 1, 2016, he became a permanent resident. He has made four overnight trips to the U.S. for one night only but has not otherwise left Canada. In what month did he become eligible for citizenship based on his days of residency?
A) January 2019
B) January 2021
C) January 2018
D) June 2018
D: Further to s. 5(1.001)(a) for every day during which the Rhodri was physically present in Canada as a protected person under the IRPA before becoming a permanent resident, he accumulated half of a day of physical presence, up to a maximum of 365 days .His time before becoming a protected person is not credited. He therefore accumulated six (6) months of physical presence during his year as a protected person. He must therefore wait an additional 2.5 years after becoming a PR, for a total of 3 years, before applying for citizenship.
Additionally, any part of a day spent in Canada counts as a day of physical presence – his overnight trips therefore do not deduct from the overall total as he spent at least part of each day in Canada.
Finally, a Canadian born child does not ever alter eligibility for Canadian citizenship contrary to the popular “anchor baby” myth.
Which of the following individuals must complete an English language test for a regular grant of citizenship under s. 5 of the Act?
A) A 55 year old applicant with no formal education.
B) A 34 year old applicant who completed their post-secondary studies at Queen’s.
C) A 46 year old applicant who completed their post-secondary studies abroad in Spanish.
D) A 43 year old who completed LINC (Language Instruction for Newcomers to Canada) training and achieved a CLB of 4
C: Those who are above the age of 54 or who have completed post-secondary studies in English or French, or certain programs such as the LINC and achieved a CLB of 4 or greater, are all exempt from completing an English language test.
Cosmin has been a permanent resident of Canada for 10 years and has owned a construction company in Calgary for the last 8 years. He often pays many of his employees in cash to avoid payroll taxes. Which of the following is true with respect to his tax obligations prior to applying for citizenship?
A) He must have complied with the tax filing obligations under the Income Tax Act for the last 5 years.
B) He must have complied with the tax filing obligations under the Income Tax Act for himself and his business for at least 3 of the last 5 years.
C) He must have complied with the tax filing obligations under the Income Tax Act for himself for the last at least 3 of the last 5 years.
D) He must have complied with the tax filing obligations under the Income Tax Act since coming to Canada.
C: The requirements relate to personal income tax returns, not taxes for businesses that the applicant may own. They requirement is only 3 of the last 5 years, however, when he files, the CRA may advise him that he owes back taxes for years past, which he would have to resolve.
True or False: Citizenship applicants must have paid taxes for at least 3 of the last 5 years preceding their application for citizenship.
False: Applicants are not required to have paid any amount in taxes; in many circumstances they may not owe taxes. However, they must have filed their taxes and otherwise met their tax filing obligations under the Income Tax Act for the appropriate relevant period.
Which of the following is not an exemption to birthright citizenship (jus soli) for a person if, at the time of his birth, neither of his parents was a citizen or lawfully admitted to Canada for permanent residence and either of his parents was:
A) A diplomatic or consular officer or other representative or employee in Canada of a foreign government
B) An employee in the service of a person referred to in paragraph (a)
C) An officer or employee in Canada of a specialized agency of the United Nations with diplomatic privileges and immunities certified by the Minister of Foreign Affairs to be equivalent to those granted to a person or persons referred to in paragraph (a)
D) An employee of a foreign consulate or embassy without diplomatic privileges
D: The children of an employee or staff member of a foreign government in Canada without diplomatic privileges are not prevented from acquiring citizenship by birth in Canada. They key is whether they enjoy diplomatic privileges and immunities, as was the case with the son of Russian spies in the Supreme Court’s seminal case of Vavilov.
Which of the following is not an exception to the physical presence requirements for residency under the Citizenship Act? (select all that apply)
A) An applicant who during the six years immediately before the date of their application, completed three years of service in the Canadian Armed Forces
B) A permanent resident who is outside Canada accompanying a Canadian citizen who is their spouse or common-law partner or, in the case of a child, their parent
C) A permanent resident who is the minor child of a citizen, if an application for citizenship is made by a person authorized to make the application on their behalf
D) A permanent resident who is outside Canada employed on a full-time basis by a Canadian business
B & D: These two are exceptions to the PR residency requirements under IRPA s. 28(2) but are not an exception to the residency requirements for citizenship. The two residency requirements should not be conflated, which is a common mistake.
Konstantina was born in Greece and sponsored to Canada by her husband, Christos, who had recently become a citizen. In Canada, they had a daughter, Maria. After several years, they decided to move back to Greece for work and to be closer to family. In Greece, they had a son, Bill. Which of the following is true regarding the citizenship status of the children?
A) Neither Maria nor Bill are citizens since Konstantina was not a citizen at the time of their birth.
B) Maria is a citizen, but Bill is not as he is the second generation born abroad.
C) Both Maria and Bill are Canadian citizens.
D) Maria is a citizen by birth, but Bill must apply for a grant of citizenship.
C: Both children are citizens. Maria was born in Canada (jus soli), and the first generation born abroad rule does not limit Bill as at least one of his parents was naturalized in Canada after being born abroad (jus sanguinis). Bill’s children, however, would be considered the second generation born abroad and not entitled to citizenship. Bill does not have to apply for a “grant” of citizenship, just proof of citizenship (i.e. a citizenship certificate application).
Which of the following is not a method of acquiring Canadian citizenship?
A) Jus soli (citizenship by birth)
B) Jus sanguinis (citizenship by descent)
C) Jure matrimonii (citizenship by marriage)
D) Naturalization (citizenship by grant)
C: While some countries provide for citizenship by marriage, this is not the case under the Citizenship Act. A spouse of a citizen must first be sponsored as a PR and then meet the other requirements for citizenship as with any PR.
Which of the following are among the requirements for an adult grant of citizenship under s. 5 of the Act? (select all that apply)
A) Demonstrating 3 out of 5 years of residence in Canada
B) Filing income taxes
C) Declaring an intention to reside in Canada
D) Completing a Canadian knowledge test
E) All of the above
A, B and D: The “intention to reside” provision was introduced under the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act in 2015 but later removed
What is maximum number of citizenships an individual can hold under Canadian law?
A) Only Canadian citizenship.
B) Dual-citizenship with their home country and Canada.
C) Dual-citizenship with Canada and any country that grants them citizenship after becoming a Canadian citizen.
D) Unlimited.
D: Under Canadian law, there are no restrictions on how many multiple citizenships an individual may hold in addition to Canadian citizenship. Every country decides whom it considers to be a citizen. If more than one country recognizes an individual as a citizen, there is no effect on Canadian citizenship. No separate permission or application for dual or multiple citizenship is required.
Notably, however, other countries have limitations on citizenship. Some countries (e.g. India) prohibit holding dual-citizenship with another country and require citizens give up their citizenship when acquiring another citizenship. These laws are specific to each nation.
Afsaneh is scheduled to take the oath of citizenship as the final step to her grant of citizenship. On the day of the oath, she would like to continue to wear her niqab and swear the oath of Canadian citizenship on the Quran. Will she be permitted to do so?
A) No, IRCC officials must verify the individual has publicly recited the oath, which will be impeded by her veil.
B) Yes, she will be allowed to do so if she requests an accommodation and follows the required procedure.
C) No, she must either swear the oath on the bible or affirm the oath in a neutral manner.
D) A and C
B: Further to the case of Ishaq, the Courts have ruled taking the oath should allow the greatest possible freedom in religious solemnization.
Hassan is a member of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF). For the past four (4) years, Hassan and his wife, Goli, have been living abroad where Hassan has been stationed for his employment. They have both been permanent residents for over 5 years. Could they be eligible to apply for citizenship?
A) Only Hassan may be eligible as he has fulfilled the condition of serving with the CAF for at least three (3) years.
B) Hassan may be eligible, but Goli is not as Hassan is not a Canadian citizen who is employed by the CAF.
C) Both Hassan and Goli may be eligible.
D) Neither Hassan or Goli are eligible until they return to Canada.
C: Hassan may be eligible under both s. 5(1.01) and (1.2) of the Citizenship Act. Goli may be eligible under s. 5(1.03). In full, the relevant provisions provide as follows:
Period of physical presence — permanent residents
(1.02) Any day during which an applicant for citizenship was a permanent resident within the meaning of subsection 2(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and was employed outside Canada in or with the Canadian Armed Forces, the federal public administration or the public service of a province, otherwise than as a locally engaged person, shall be treated as equivalent to one day of physical presence in Canada for the purposes of paragraphs (1)(c) and 11(1)(d).
Period of physical presence — residing with permanent residents
(1.03) Any day during which an applicant for citizenship was the spouse or common-law partner, or child, of a permanent resident referred to in subsection (1.02) and resided with that permanent resident shall be treated as equivalent to one day of physical presence in Canada for the purposes of paragraphs (1)(c) and 11(1)(d).
Canadian Armed Forces — permanent resident
(1. 2) Paragraph (1)(c) does not apply to a permanent resident within the meaning of subsection 2(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act who has, subject to the regulations, no unfulfilled conditions under that Act relating to his or her status as a permanent resident and who
(a) during the six years immediately before the date of his or her application, completed three years of service in the Canadian Armed Forces; and
(b) has met any applicable requirement under the Income Tax Act to file a return of income in respect of three taxation years that are fully or partially within the six years immediately before the date of his or her application.
Which of the following are among the legal requirements for an adopted child of a citizen to be granted citizenship under the Act?
A) the adoption was in the best interests of the child
B) the adoption created a genuine relationship of parent and child
C) the adoption was in accordance with the laws of the place where the adoption took place and the laws of the country of residence of the adopting citizen
D) the adoption did not occur in a manner that circumvented the legal requirements for international adoptions
E) the adoption was not entered into primarily for the purpose of acquiring a status or privilege in relation to immigration or citizenship
F) all of the above
ALL: These are all requirements under s. 5.1(1) of the Act.
Mark has lived in Canada for the past 20 years, where owns a house and small business. His wife and children are all Canadian citizens. In the last few years, he has had to travel back and forth to the U.K. to attend to his mother who is ill. Recently, he applied for citizenship but it turns out he miscalculated and is 2 days short of the 1,095 days of residence required (i.e. 1,093). If the file is referred to a Citizenship Judge, can the Judge grant Mark’s application in her discretion?
A) Yes, if she determines Mark’s place of continual habitual residence is in Canada.
B) Yes, because it is a de minimis shortfall.
C) Yes, if the Judge believes there are sufficient humanitarian and compassionate grounds.
D) No, a Citizenship Judge does not have the discretion to grant the application.
D: While this type of discretion existed for many years, it was removed following the passage of Bill C-24 in 2015.
Rajiv is a PR of Canada who recently renounced his citizenship in the U.S. He relinquished his original Indian citizenship when he became a U.S. citizen. Can he apply for citizenship as a stateless individual?
A) Yes, because he is not currently the citizen of any country.
B) No, because he is a PR of Canada.
C) No, because he voluntarily chose to renounce his U.S. citizenship.
D) It depends on whether he is entitled to regain his Indian citizenship.
D: Further to the FCA, a person is stateless only where, as a legal or practical matter, the person cannot get citizenship or national status elsewhere. Budlakoti v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2015 FCA 139 at para. 23
Which of the following individuals may be considered for a special grant of citizenship?
A) An athlete who as a PR has excelled at domestic competition and may represent Canada at the Olympics.
B) A U.N. official who works in conflict zones abroad for most of the year, but whose primary home and family are all in Canada.
C) An individual who has lived in Canada for many years but is stateless.
D) All of the above.
D: Section 5(4) of the Citizenship Act provides the Minister broad discretion as follows:
(4) Despite any other provision of this Act, the Minister may, in his or her discretion, grant citizenship to any person to alleviate cases of statelessness or of special and unusual hardship or to reward services of an exceptional value to Canada.
While the cases above may not be granted, they can be considered by the Minister per the wording of s. 5(4).
Naruhito is a 16 year old permanent resident of Canada. He has lived in Canada for the last 8 years. He became a PR as part of the application of his parents who are also permanent residents who spend a majority their time working abroad. During the school year, Naruhito resides primarily at his school dormitories at a private boarding school. Is Naruhito entitled to apply for citizenship?
A) Yes, under s. 5(1) of the Act if he has met his residence and other requirements.
B) Yes, under s. 5(2) of the Act if he has met his residence and other requirements.
C) No, because neither of his parents are Canadian citizens.
D) No, because neither of his parents meet the residence requirements and cannot include him as part of their application.
A: Following Bill C-16 in 2017, minors can now apply for citizenship without a Canadian parent, as the age requirement for citizenship has been removed under subsection 5(1). A person having custody of the minor or empowered to act on their behalf by court order, written agreement or operation of law, can now apply for citizenship on behalf of the minor.
This may be beneficial in myriad circumstances such as if the minor has more residence in the Canada than the parents; for example, if they have spent time living with relatives in Canada or in boarding school while parents are abroad. Counsel may also consider this option if there are hurdles to obtaining the parents’ citizenship, such as a prohibition stemming from a prior criminal conviction or an active investigation. In certain circumstances, if minors have applied with parents and that application is suspended under s. 13.1 of the Act, counsel may consider filing a separate application for the minors.
B is not the correct answer. Under s. 5(2) of the Citizenship Act, a legal guardian who is not a Canadian citizen may apply for citizenship on behalf of the minor child but Canadian citizenship can only be granted if one of the parents (natural or adoptive) is already a Canadian citizen.
Can an individual who was born outside of Canada and living outside Canada who is registered under the Indian Act apply for Canadian citizenship?
A) No, they must first apply for permanent residence and then reside in Canada for at least 1,095 days as a PR.
B) No, they must first reside in Canada for at least 1,095 days.
C) Yes, they are entitled to apply for Canadian citizenship and then come reside in Canada.
D) No, they are entitled to reside in Canada, but must apply for permanent residence and meet the same requirements in order to apply for citizenship.
B: For the purposes of assessing whether a registered Indian who is applying for a grant of citizenship meets the requirement to be a permanent resident as provided in paragraph 5(1)(c), 5(2) or 11(1)(d) of the Citizenship Act,
the date the applicant was admitted to Canada as a registered Indian should be used as the equivalent of the date the person became a permanent resident (landing date);
(if the applicant was registered as an Indian after their entry into Canada) the date of registration should be used as the equivalent of the date the person became a permanent resident.
There is no requirement to apply for permanent residency. This process is deemed to be authorized under paragraph 2(2)(b) of the Citizenship Act, which states that “a person who is lawfully present and entitled to permanently reside in Canada is deemed to have been lawfully admitted to Canada for permanent residence.”
Anna is a citizen of Canada residing in Mexico City. For the past 10 years, she has been looking after her nephew, Miguel, since his parents passed away when he was 12 years old. Most recently, Anna has decided to return Canada and has adopted Miguel under the laws of Mexico. Is it possible for Miguel to be granted citizenship?
A) No, because Miguel is 20 years old and is too old to be granted citizenship based on adoption.
B) No, because the adoption was not done in accordance with Canadian laws.
C) Yes, because Anna was residing in Mexico at the time of the adoption.
D) No, because Miguel was not a minor at the time of the adoption.
C: Pursuant to s. 5.1(2) of the Citizenship Act adult adoptions may qualify for citizenship if (a) there was a genuine relationship of parent and child between the person and the adoptive parent before the person attained the age of 18 years and at the time of the adoption; and
(b) the adoption meets the requirements set out in paragraphs 5.1(1)(c) to (d). This includes the fact the adoption must have been in accordance with the laws of the country where it took place and where the citizen was residing. In the immediate scenario, the adoption took place in Mexico where Anna was residing and it appears there is has been a genuine relationship of parent/child for many years. Notably, the question asks if it is possible for Miguel to be granted citizenship, as these as well as other sometimes subjective factors would have to be assessed by IRCC.
Which of the following requirements cannot be waived by the Minister on compassionate grounds?
A) Whether an adult has adequate knowledge of one of the official languages of Canada
B) Whether an adult demonstrates in one of the official languages of Canada that he or she has an adequate knowledge of Canada and of the responsibilities and privileges of citizenship
C) Whether an adult meets the requirement respecting length of physical presence in Canada
D) Whether a minor meets the requirement respecting length of physical presence in Canada
C: Pursuant to s. 5(3) of the Citizenship Act, the requirement respecting length of physical presence in Canada can only be waived for minors on compassionate grounds, not adults.
Joel’s citizenship application was recently refused based on a finding that he misrepresented or withheld material circumstances relating to a relevant matter, namely by failing to disclose a prior criminal conviction on his application. For how long is Joel prohibited from applying for citizenship?
A) Five years
B) Four years
C) Ten years
D) Until his criminal conviction his pardoned or received a record suspension
Five years: Pursuant to s. 22(1)(e.2) of the Act, an individual is prohibited from applying for citizenship for a period of five (5) years after their application is refused based on a finding of misrepresentation under s. 22(1)(e.1). Note, this penalty is unrelated to any prohibition related to the criminal conviction itself in this case. Note also that the prohibition doubles to ten (10) years if the misrepresentation is discovered after citizenship has been granted and citizenship is revoked for that reason. Therefore, the penalty differs depending on at what stage the misrepresentation is discovered and acted upon by IRCC.
Two years ago, Sally was convicted in Canada of a drug related offence punishable by way of indictment under the Criminal Code. Five months ago, Sally was charged in Ireland with a similar offence that if committed in Canada could constitute an indictable offence; the charge has yet to be adjudicated. Which of the following is true?
A) Sally can apply for citizenship and ask the Minister for compassionate consideration to overcome her prior criminal history given that they were non-violent offences stemming from a drug addiction, for which she has since successfully completed an extensive rehabilitation program.
B) Sally can ask the Minister for compassionate consideration to overcome the charge in Ireland but not the Canadian conviction.
C) Sally can ask the Minister for compassionate consideration to overcome the Canadian conviction but not the charge in Ireland.
D) Sally cannot ask for any compassionate consideration under the Citizenship Act as s. 25 of the IRPA does not apply.
B: Section 22(1.1) of the Act specifically provides for a potential waiver from the applicability of section 22(1)(b.1) on compassionate grounds. This also serves to highlight how little discretion the minister is allowed with respect to the application of all other provisions regardless of any possible humanitarian factors and unlike the wide latitude afforded by s. 25 of IRPA.
Jo-Ann recently received a negative decision on her citizenship application. She is seeking your advice as to her available options of appealing or challenging the decision. What option is available to her?
A) She can file an appeal with IRCC to have the case considered by a Citizenship Judge.
B) She can file for judicial review in Federal Court within 15 days.
C) She can file for judicial review in Federal Court within 30 days.
D) She can file an appeal with the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) of the IRB.
C: Pursuant to s. 22.1 of the Act, she has 30 days to file for judicial review from the date she was notified or made aware of the decision (practically, counting from the date of the decision itself is the safest option unless there is a major discrepancy). Note, that this differs from the 15 days timeline under the IRPA and the two should not be conflated. There is no appeal option with the IRB. The IRB does not have jurisdiction over citizenship matters and there is no formal internal appeal with IRCC. While consultants do not practice in Federal Court it is important to know these possibilities and the timelines therefor so as to be able to properly advise clients of their available options.
For how many years is an individual prohibited from applying for citizenship after being convicted of an indictable offence under an Act of Parliament?
A) Four years after the completion of the sentence imposed
B) Four years after the date of conviction
C) Five years after the date of conviction
D) Five years after the date of the offence
B: Pursuant to s. 22(2) of the Act, an individual must not have been convicted of an indictable offence in the four years prior to their application for citizenship. The clock starts from the conviction date not the date the sentence is compete, which is one important way the Citizenship Act differs from IRPA.
