Section 40 is the most serious finding in Canadian immigration law, and the most misunderstood. Intent is not required, and honest people are caught by it every year.
Most people assume misrepresentation means lying. It does not. Under section 40 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, you can be found inadmissible for misrepresentation for something you did carelessly, something you did not think mattered, or something an agent filed in your name without your knowledge.
The consequence is severe and long lasting, which is why this deserves to be understood properly.
In substance, a person is inadmissible for directly or indirectly misrepresenting or withholding material facts relating to a relevant matter, where doing so induces or could induce an error in the administration of the Act.
Two features of that wording do most of the damage:
A finding of misrepresentation generally renders a foreign national inadmissible to Canada for five years. During that period you cannot be granted status, and the finding follows you into every future application afterwards, because you must disclose it.
For permanent residents, misrepresentation can put status itself at risk. For families, a finding against one member can affect the applications of others.
There is an exception, but it is much narrower than people hope. It generally requires that you honestly and reasonably believed you were not withholding material information, and that the knowledge was genuinely beyond your control.
"I did not read the form carefully" does not qualify. "My consultant filled it in and I signed without checking" does not usually qualify either. What can qualify is a genuinely unknowable fact, and even then it must be carefully argued.
Options depend on your situation and may include judicial review, an appeal to the Immigration Appeal Division where such a right exists, an application for authorization to return to Canada where a removal order was issued, or humanitarian and compassionate relief. None of these is automatic, and all reward early, careful preparation.
No. Carelessness can be enough. Intent is not required.
Generally five years, and the finding must be disclosed in later applications even after that.
Usually not on its own. You are generally responsible for what is filed in your name.
It can be challenged, most often by judicial review, and the deadlines are short.
No. That compounds the problem seriously. Always disclose and address it.
Get advice on a misrepresentation allegation See our litigation service →
Immigration, family, corporate or cross-border. We will tell you honestly what can be done, and what cannot.
Book a Consultation第40条是加拿大移民法中最严重、也最被误解的认定。它不要求"故意"，每年都有诚实的申请人因此中招。
多数人以为"误导性陈述"就是说谎。并不是。依《移民和难民保护法》第40条，您可能因为一次疏忽、一件您认为无关紧要的事，甚至因为中介以您名义提交而您并不知情的材料，被认定为误导性陈述而不可受理。
其后果严重且持久，因此值得认真弄懂。
其实质是：任何人直接或间接就相关事项作出误导性陈述，或隐瞒重要事实，且该行为已导致或可能导致本法适用上的错误，即属不可受理。
这段措辞中，有两点造成了绝大部分伤害：
一旦被认定误导性陈述，外国国民通常在五年内不可受理入境加拿大。在此期间您无法获得身份；而且即便五年之后，该认定仍会跟随您，因为在此后的每一次申请中您都必须如实申报。
对永久居民而言，误导性陈述可能危及身份本身。对家庭而言，一位成员被认定，可能影响其他成员的申请。
确实存在例外，但比多数人期待的要窄得多。它通常要求：您真诚且合理地相信自己并未隐瞒重要信息，且该信息确实超出您的掌控范围。
"我没仔细看表格"不符合。"顾问填的，我没看就签了字"通常也不符合。真正可能符合的，是某项确实无从知晓的事实，而且即便如此，仍需要审慎地论证。
可选路径取决于您的具体情形，可能包括司法复议、在存在上诉权时向移民上诉庭上诉、在已签发遣返令时申请返加授权(ARC)，或人道及同情申请。这些都不会自动获得，且都回报越早、越充分的准备。
不需要。疏忽也可能构成，法律不要求故意。
通常五年；且即便期满，此后申请仍须申报该认定。
通常单凭这一点不足以抗辩。以您名义提交的材料，一般由您负责。
可以尝试挑战，最常见是司法复议，但时限很短。
不行。那会让问题严重得多。务必如实申报并正面处理。