Jie “Ellen” Lin, RCIC

什么是 Excluded Family Member（被排除的家庭成员）？

最近接触到一宗配偶担保案件。

申请人与担保人的关系持续多年，后来也正式登记结婚。从感情真实性来看，双方有长期交往、共同生活以及朋友见证，并不是为了移民而临时建立的关系。

但案件真正面对的问题，并不是婚姻是否真实，而是担保人在自己申请加拿大永久居民时，是否已经与申请人构成了法律意义上的同居伴侣，以及为什么当时没有申报这段关系。

这涉及加拿大移民法中的一个概念：Excluded Family Member，通常译为“被排除的家庭成员”。

什么是 Excluded Family Member？

简单来说，如果一个人在申请永久居民时，已经有配偶或同居伴侣，却没有在申请中申报，也没有让对方接受移民审查，那么日后再通过家庭团聚担保对方时，可能会遇到非常严重的障碍。

即使双方的关系完全真实，未被申报和审查的一方，仍可能被认定为不属于可以通过家庭团聚类别担保的家庭成员。

“我们没有结婚，所以我以为不需要申报”

这类案件中最常见的误区，是申请人把“配偶”理解为必须已经登记结婚。

但加拿大移民法除了认可合法婚姻，也认可 Common-law Partner，也就是同居伴侣。

如果双方已经连续共同生活至少一年，并且关系具有婚姻性质，即使没有结婚证，也可能已经构成需要申报的家庭成员。

很多普通申请人可能会认为：

• 还没有结婚，只是男女朋友；
• 没有共同账户，所以不算同居伴侣；
• 没有向父母公开关系，所以还不能算家庭成员；
• 只要对方不一起移民，就不需要填写；
• 同居关系从自己“决定承认”的那一天才开始计算。

但移民部判断双方关系时，通常不会只看当事人如何称呼彼此，而会看实际同居时间以及双方共同生活的真实状态。

后来结婚，并不会自动解决以前的问题

这类案件另一个值得注意的地方是，双方后来可能已经结婚。

很多人会自然地认为，既然以前是以同居伴侣身份相处，现在已经成为合法夫妻，那么重新以配偶身份申请，问题应该就解决了。

实际上并不一定。

移民官仍然会回到原来的时间点，审查担保人在取得永久居民身份时，双方是否已经构成同居伴侣。

如果当时已经构成同居关系，而对方没有被申报，那么后来结婚改变的是双方现在的婚姻状态，却未必能够消除过去未申报的问题。

因此，这类案件即使婚姻真实，也仍然可能被拒绝。

案件的重点不只是证明感情真实

普通配偶担保申请通常会提交大量材料证明关系真实性，例如照片、聊天记录、旅行记录、朋友证明信和共同生活文件。

这些材料当然重要。

但在 Excluded Family Member 案件中，仅仅证明双方真心相爱，往往还不够。申请人还必须面对一个更加困难的问题：在担保人申请永久居民时，双方究竟是什么关系？

如果双方当时已经共同生活超过一年，就需要进一步解释：

• 同居从什么时候开始；
• 当时双方如何理解自己的关系；
• 为什么没有申报；
• 是否曾经获得错误或不完整的专业意见；
• 以前提交的申请表、地址和关系时间线是否一致；
• 目前是否存在可以适用的政策或其他补救途径。

这也是为什么，这类案件不能只通过增加照片或补交结婚证来处理。

时间线往往决定案件方向

处理这类案件时，最重要的工作之一，是重新整理完整的关系时间线。

• 什么时候开始交往？
• 什么时候开始经常留宿？
• 什么时候正式搬到一起生活？
• 共同生活是否连续满一年？
• 担保人是什么时候递交永久居民申请，又是什么时候成为永久居民？

这些日期之间可能只相差几个月，但对案件结果却可能产生完全不同的影响。

同时，申请人现在的解释必须与以前提交过的移民材料、租约、地址记录、工作文件、学校记录和个人陈述相互一致。

如果为了避免同居关系而临时修改时间线，反而可能引起更严重的可信度问题。

这类案件带来的提醒

这类案件最令人遗憾的地方，是双方的关系可能完全真实，但因为当初不了解同居伴侣的法律定义，或者申请材料没有正确申报，导致以后申请家庭团聚时才发现问题。

对于正在申请永久居民的人来说，如果已经与伴侣共同生活，不能仅仅因为没有结婚，就认定对方不是家庭成员。如果不确定是否已经构成同居关系，应当在递交申请前核实清楚。

对于已经因为未申报配偶或同居伴侣收到程序公平信或拒签信的人，也不宜只是更换申请类别或立即重新递交。首先需要弄清楚的，是移民官如何认定过去的关系，以及原来的法律障碍是否真正得到处理。

一段关系是否真实，与一个人是否具备家庭团聚担保资格，是两个不同的问题。

这正是 Excluded Family Member 案件中最容易被忽略、也最值得警惕的地方。

A Genuine Marriage Can Still Be Refused

Recently, I came across a spousal sponsorship case involving a couple who had been in a genuine relationship for many years and had later legally married.

Their evidence of a real relationship was substantial. The central problem, however, was not whether their marriage was genuine.

The real issue was whether, at the time the sponsor applied for and obtained permanent residence, the couple had already become common-law partners and, if so, why that relationship had not been declared.

What Is an Excluded Family Member?

In simple terms, a person may become an excluded family member if this person was already the applicant’s spouse or common-law partner when the applicant became a permanent resident, but this person was not declared and examined as part of that earlier immigration process.

The consequence can be severe: even where the relationship is genuine, that person may later face a serious barrier to being sponsored under the family class.

“We Were Not Married, So I Did Not Think I Had to Declare the Relationship”

This is one of the most common misunderstandings in these cases. Many people assume that only a legally married spouse must be declared. Canadian immigration law, however, also recognizes common-law partners.

If two people have lived together continuously for at least one year in a marriage-like relationship, they may already be common-law partners even without a marriage certificate, a joint bank account, or family approval.

Immigration officers look at the actual living arrangement and the nature of the relationship. They do not rely only on the label the couple used at the time.

A Later Marriage Does Not Automatically Cure the Earlier Problem

Another difficult aspect of this kind of case is that the couple may later marry and believe that a new application as legal spouses will resolve the issue. It may not.

The officer may still return to the earlier period and ask whether the couple had already become common-law partners before the sponsor obtained permanent residence.

A marriage changes the couple’s current legal status, but it does not necessarily erase a past failure to declare a family member.

Why Proof of a Genuine Relationship May Not Be Enough

In an ordinary sponsorship application, photographs, messages, travel records, shared expenses, and letters from friends may help prove that the relationship is genuine.

In an excluded family member case, those materials remain important, but they do not answer the whole problem.

The application must also address the earlier immigration history: when cohabitation began, whether it had reached one continuous year, how the couple understood their relationship at the time, and why the partner was not declared.

The Timeline Often Determines the Direction of the Case

These cases frequently turn on dates. When did the couple begin living together? Was one person merely staying over, or had they established a shared home? Had they lived together continuously for one year before the sponsor became a permanent resident?

Those dates must be compared carefully with earlier immigration forms, addresses, leases, school or employment records, tax documents, and previous statements.

Trying to revise the timeline simply to avoid a common-law finding can create a separate credibility problem.

The Practical Lesson

The most troubling feature of these cases is that the relationship may be completely genuine. The problem may arise because the couple misunderstood the legal definition of a common-law partnership or because the earlier application did not properly disclose the relationship.

Anyone applying for permanent residence who is already living with a partner should not assume that no declaration is required simply because the couple is not married. The relationship should be assessed before the application is filed.

Likewise, where a person has already received a procedural fairness letter or a refusal based on an undeclared spouse or common-law partner, immediately filing another sponsorship application may not solve the problem. The earlier immigration history and the legal obstacle must first be understood and addressed.

A genuine relationship and eligibility to be sponsored are two separate questions.