Section 117(1)(h) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (“IRPR“) provides that:
A foreign national is a member of the family class if, with respect to a sponsor, the foreign national is
a relative of the sponsor, regardless of age, if the sponsor does not have a spouse, a common-law partner, a conjugal partner, a child, a mother or father, a relative who is a child of that mother or father, a relative who is a child of a child of that mother or father, a mother or father of that mother or father or a relative who is a child of the mother or father of that mother or father
(i) who is a Canadian citizen, Indian or permanent resident, or
(ii) whose application to enter and remain in Canada as a permanent resident the sponsor may otherwise sponsor.
Traditionally, IRPR 117(1)(h) has been interpreted as stating that a Canadian may sponsor a relative only if they do not have any living spouses, children, or parents who they can sponsor. However, the Federal Court in Sendwa v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) has ruled that this is too restrictive. It has found that the stated that the purpose and intent of paragraph 117(1)(h) of the IRPR is “to favour persons who do not have relations in Canada and have no possibility to sponsor any relations under other provisions.” It went on to state:
In the present case, the IAD held that the Applicant’s application was rejected simply because her parents were alive. The IAD did not consider whether the Applicant would (even) be eligible (or in position) to sponsor her parents. As a result, the IAD’s decision is unreasonable.
As such, admissibility and eligibility considerations are now a factor in determining eligibility for IRPR 117(1)(h) applications.