Two foreign nationals were found inadmissible on security grounds under s. 34(1)(e) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act for engaging in acts of violence, without any alleged link to national security or the security of Canada.
The administrative tribunals interpreted s. 34(1)(e) as not requiring such a nexus.
Applying the Vavilov reasonableness review framework, the Supreme Court held that the administrative decisions were unreasonable for failing to address critical points of statutory context, the broad consequences of the interpretation, and Canada's non-refoulement obligations under the Refugee Convention.
The Court held that the only reasonable interpretation of s. 34(1)(e) requires a nexus between the relevant acts of violence and national security or the security of Canada.
Appeals allowed and administrative decisions quashed.
