Galina Bining

The applicant sought judicial review of a decision by the Refugee Protection Division (RPD) denying a permanent stay of proceedings for abuse of process and granting the Minister's application to vacate his refugee status under s. 109(1) of the IRPA.

The applicant claimed that a 9-year delay by the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) in bringing the vacation application amounted to an abuse of process.

The RPD found the delay did not cause significant prejudice or taint the proceedings, and accepted evidence that the applicant used undisclosed alternate identities and misstated his residency.

The Federal Court held the RPD correctly applied the Blencoe test for abuse of process and reasonably determined the delay was outweighed by the public interest in removing refugee protection gained by misrepresentation.

The applicant sought judicial review of decisions by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) cancelling his permanent residence application and denying his request for reconsideration.

The IRCC rejected the application because the applicant did not provide a diploma or degree as proof of his completed Canadian educational credential, even though he submitted a 'Certified Information' document from his university.

The Federal Court allowed the application, finding that the IRCC's online instructions were confusing and misled the applicant into believing his submitted document was sufficient.

The Court concluded that it would have been simple for IRCC to contact the applicant to request a copy of his diploma, given the circumstances, and referred the matter back for reconsideration.

The applicant sought judicial review of an immigration officer's decision refusing his application for permanent residence on humanitarian and compassionate grounds.

The applicant argued the officer erred in assessing his establishment and hardship, conflated the two, and breached procedural fairness by relying on extrinsic evidence and making veiled credibility findings.

The Federal Court dismissed the application, finding the officer's assessment of establishment and hardship reasonable, and concluding no procedural fairness breach occurred.

The applicant, a citizen of Syria, sought judicial review of an immigration officer's decision finding him inadmissible for permanent residence under paragraph 34(1)(d) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

The officer determined there were reasonable grounds to believe the applicant presented a danger to the security of Canada due to his long employment at a senior level with the Scientific Studies and Research Centre in Syria, an organization involved in producing chemical weapons.

The applicant argued that his admissibility was already decided when he received a temporary resident permit and that the officer overlooked evidence of his employment under duress.

The Federal Court dismissed the application, holding that the granting of a temporary resident permit does not preclude a later inadmissibility finding and that the officer's decision was reasonable based on the evidence.