It seems to me that this distinction is appropriate and relevant - the future contingency is one that should be clear, and in mind. The test in Hyland v. Hyland might be restated as “a person intends an indefinite residence unless that person commences a residency with clear and identified criteria on which that residency will end”. More colloquially, that might be expressed as a person “being here to stay, unless something happens.”
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.