Alexandra Scott

The applicants sought judicial review of a decision denying their application for permanent resident status on humanitarian and compassionate grounds.

The Federal Court found the officer's decision unreasonable due to significant misapprehensions of evidence regarding the applicants' establishment in Canada, their history of residence in Greece, health considerations, and adverse country conditions in India.

The application for judicial review was granted and the matter remitted for redetermination.

The self-represented applicant filed a motion under Rule 58 alleging an irregularity because the respondent did not file an affidavit in response to his underlying application.

The Federal Court dismissed the motion, explaining that Rule 307 sets timelines but does not compel a respondent to file evidence.

The Court noted the applicant's repeated unreasonable demands, his refusal to participate in case management, and characterized his conduct as uninformed and abusive.

Costs of $1,500 were awarded against the applicant.

The applicant, a citizen of India, applied for a temporary resident visa to work as a plumber in Canada.

A visa officer refused the application, finding there were reasonable grounds to believe the applicant would be unable to perform the work, based on inconsistencies regarding the applicant's alleged employment as a plumber in India.

The applicant sought judicial review, arguing the decision was unreasonable and that the officer exhibited a reasonable apprehension of bias during an interview.

The Federal Court dismissed the application, holding the officer's conclusion was justified based on the evidence and that the officer's probing questions did not establish a reasonable apprehension of bias.