Chaobo Jiang

The applicant sought judicial review of a CBSA officer's decision to issue a report under section 44(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which found him inadmissible for failing to provide requested information regarding his pending sexual assault charge.

The Federal Court held the decision was reasonable and not procedurally unfair, as the onus remained on the applicant to provide the information directly to IRCC.

The applicant sought judicial review of a decision refusing her application for a Temporary Resident Permit.

The Officer found that the applicant failed to establish compelling reasons to remain in Canada, citing that her adult daughter could be supported by the applicant's Canadian husband, that the couple could potentially live in China, and that her physical presence was not strictly required for ongoing proceedings against her former immigration consultant.

The Federal Court found the Officer reasonably applied the compelling reasons test and adequately weighed the evidence, concluding the decision was justified, intelligible, and transparent.

The application for judicial review was dismissed.

The applicants, citizens of the Philippines, sought judicial review of a decision by a Canada Border Services Agency officer refusing to defer their removal from Canada.

The applicants had been found inadmissible due to misrepresentation on their permanent residence applications.

The applicants requested deferrals to arrange care for their Canadian-born children and await passport processing.

The Federal Court found that the officer's decision was reasonable, noting that the applicants had ample time (over two years) to make arrangements and that the officer properly considered the children's short-term best interests.