Fazal v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
Court headnote
Fazal v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2004-04-27 Neutral citation 2004 FC 621 File numbers IMM-2603-03 Decision Content Date: 20040427 Docket: IMM-2603-03 Citation: 2004 FC 621 Toronto, Ontario, April 27th, 2004 Present: The Honourable Madam Justice Layden-Stevenson BETWEEN: MOHAMMADU FAZAL Applicant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER [1] When the applicant's wife sponsored him to come to Canada, the applicant was twice interviewed at the Canadian High Commission in Columbo. In denying the application, the visa officer made two findings: the applicant did not meet the requirements for permanent residence because he was inadmissible under paragraph 36(1)(c) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 (IRPA); no appeal of the decision could be made to the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD). [2] Despite the articulate submissions of counsel and my sympathy for the applicant who finds himself in a Catch 22 situation, in the face of his admissions I can find no basis in law for concluding that the officer erred in arriving at the determination with respect to inadmissibility. A visa officer does not possess the equitable jurisdiction of the IAD. [3] The respondent concedes that the second determination, that no appeal could be made to the IAD, is an error of law. On that basis, the application for judicial review will be allowed and the matter …
Read full judgment
Fazal v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2004-04-27 Neutral citation 2004 FC 621 File numbers IMM-2603-03 Decision Content Date: 20040427 Docket: IMM-2603-03 Citation: 2004 FC 621 Toronto, Ontario, April 27th, 2004 Present: The Honourable Madam Justice Layden-Stevenson BETWEEN: MOHAMMADU FAZAL Applicant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER [1] When the applicant's wife sponsored him to come to Canada, the applicant was twice interviewed at the Canadian High Commission in Columbo. In denying the application, the visa officer made two findings: the applicant did not meet the requirements for permanent residence because he was inadmissible under paragraph 36(1)(c) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 (IRPA); no appeal of the decision could be made to the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD). [2] Despite the articulate submissions of counsel and my sympathy for the applicant who finds himself in a Catch 22 situation, in the face of his admissions I can find no basis in law for concluding that the officer erred in arriving at the determination with respect to inadmissibility. A visa officer does not possess the equitable jurisdiction of the IAD. [3] The respondent concedes that the second determination, that no appeal could be made to the IAD, is an error of law. On that basis, the application for judicial review will be allowed and the matter will be remitted for redetermination before a different visa officer. [4] In the circumstances and in view of the delay between the date upon which the determination was made and the date upon which the notification issued, I would hope that the respondent would make every effort to expedite the redetermination. This matter raises no question for certification. ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the application for judicial review is allowed and the matter is remitted for redetermination before a different visa officer. "Carolyn Layden-Stevenson" J.F.C. FEDERAL COURT NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: IMM-2603-03 STYLE OF CAUSE: MOHAMMADU FAZAL Applicant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO DATE OF HEARING: APRIL 27, 2004 REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER BY: LAYDEN-STEVENSON J. DATED: APRIL 27, 2004 APPEARANCES: DAVID P.YERZY FOR THE APPLICANT DAVID TYNDALE FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: DAVID P.YERZY BARRISTER AND SOLICITOR TORONTO, ONTARIO FOR THE APPLICANT MORRIS ROSENBERG DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA TORONTO, ONTARIO FOR THE RESPONDENT FEDERAL COURT TRIAL DIVISION Date: 20040427 Docket: IMM-2603-03 BETWEEN: MOHAMMADU FAZAL Applicant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
Source: decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca