本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛my apology, i forget to mention another section under current immgration law which is section 328(3) that states that for any time spent outside canada with a valid RRP within the two year period immidiately after coming into force of the immigration regulations is counted as time spent in Canada for the purpose of determining residency obligations, so the regulation came into force on June 2002.
1st year 2001 ----- 1 year in Canada
2nd year 2002 ------ Not in Canada but have valid RRP = deemed 1 year in Canada i.e. 0.5 year under section 328(2), and 0.5 year under 328(3)
3rd year 2003 ------ Not in Canada but have valid RRP = deemed 1 year in Canada under section 328(3)
4th year 2004 ------ Not in Canada
5th year 2005 July ---not in Canada, and i assume the 5th year ends January 2006.
so 3 years out of 5 years.
out of the 3.5 years he/she spent outside, 2 years were holding a valid RRP, that's to say he/she already satisfied the rule. Theoretically he may even spend another 1.5 years away from canada with no probelm (but I won't recommend and won't risk doing that).
Pls note that's only my personal comments and its better to consult experts.更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
1st year 2001 ----- 1 year in Canada
2nd year 2002 ------ Not in Canada but have valid RRP = deemed 1 year in Canada i.e. 0.5 year under section 328(2), and 0.5 year under 328(3)
3rd year 2003 ------ Not in Canada but have valid RRP = deemed 1 year in Canada under section 328(3)
4th year 2004 ------ Not in Canada
5th year 2005 July ---not in Canada, and i assume the 5th year ends January 2006.
so 3 years out of 5 years.
out of the 3.5 years he/she spent outside, 2 years were holding a valid RRP, that's to say he/she already satisfied the rule. Theoretically he may even spend another 1.5 years away from canada with no probelm (but I won't recommend and won't risk doing that).
Pls note that's only my personal comments and its better to consult experts.更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net