Maya Inuzuka

The moving party, an inmate, sought interlocutory relief including a confidentiality order, an in-camera hearing for his upcoming judicial review, and mandamus orders to prevent disclosure of his information and compel his release to a Private Home Placement if parole is granted.

The Federal Court dismissed the motion, finding the moving party failed to meet the test for a confidentiality order or in-camera hearing, and that mandamus cannot be obtained on an interlocutory motion.

The applicant sought judicial review of an immigration officer's decision refusing his work permit application to work as an electrician in Canada.

The officer refused the application under paragraph 200(3)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations because the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence of his English language proficiency, a requirement of the position.

The applicant argued the decision was unreasonable and that the officer breached procedural fairness by not waiting for his IELTS results, which were delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Federal Court held the decision was reasonable as the applicant bore the onus to submit sufficient documentation with his application and had failed to do so.

The Court also found no breach of procedural fairness, noting that the duty of fairness for work permit applications is low and does not require an officer to give an applicant an opportunity to address concerns arising from insufficient evidence.