[requester]

Record

tet) Camas aa oe naa aba Envoyé: [requester] A: Immigration Representatives / Représentants immigration (IRC) <[requester email]> Objet: [requester] [requester] you for getting back to me. This is not regarding any particular immigration program but rather the definition of "common-law partner" in general. Thank you. [requester], Feb 5, 2025 at 10:03 'a0AM Immigration Representatives / Représentants immigration (IRC) <[IRCC Immigration Representatives mailbox]> wrote: [requester] order for us to better respond to your request, can you please specify the program or category in which this scenario is occurring. Thank you kindly, [requester] De: Envoyé: [requester] A: Immigration Representatives / Représentants immigration (IRCC) <[IRCC Immigration Representatives mailbox]> Objet: [requester] Dear [requester], lam writing to seek clarifications on the definition of "cohabitation" in a common-law relationship. The operational guidelines explains that: It means continuous cohabitation for one year, not intermittent cohabitation adding up to one year. However, it continues to explain that: While cohabitation means living together continuously, from time to time, one or the other partner may have 000563

left the home for work or business travel, family obligations, and so on. The separation must be temporary and short. My question is, for common-law partners who are in their first year of cohabitation, if one travels temporarily (e.g., 2 weeks) to another country for business trip, or to visit family, would this break the continuity required? | understand that each case is assessed on its own merit and there is no hard definition as to how many days the two parties can be separate. However, | just would like to know if temporary separation like a vacation to Cancun would be allowed. Thank you for your time. [NAME REDACTED]

a00sea