Nima Omidi

The applicant sought judicial review of a decision by the Immigration Appeal Division dismissing her appeal of a visa officer's refusal of her Family Class sponsorship application for her daughter.

The applicant alleged procedural fairness breaches due to the negligence and incompetence of her former immigration consultant, who missed the application deadline causing her daughter to age out of the dependent child category, and subsequently failed to be candid about the error while continuing to represent her in a conflict of interest.

The Federal Court allowed the application, finding that the consultant's acts and omissions constituted incompetence resulting in a miscarriage of justice.

The applicant applied for judicial review of a visa officer's decision refusing his temporary resident visa application.

The visa officer was not satisfied the applicant would leave Canada at the end of his stay based on his personal assets, financial status, and the purpose of his visit.

The Federal Court found the visa officer's analysis turned on the sufficiency of the applicant's evidence regarding his personal financial circumstances and intended business exploration activities.

The Court held the decision was intelligible, reasonable, and did not invoke procedural fairness requirements based on credibility concerns.

The application for judicial review was dismissed.

The applicant, an inmate, had his PlayStation One memory card confiscated upon transfer to a medium-security institution on the basis that it was a restricted "removable or portable mass storage device" under a Commissioner's Directive.

He grieved the confiscation.

The grievance was denied at the final level.

On judicial review, the Federal Court held the decision was unreasonable.

The Court determined that the only reasonable interpretation of the Directive in context was that the prohibition referred solely to computer peripherals, not gaming system accessories.

The application was allowed and the respondent was ordered to return the memory card immediately.

The applicant sought an extension of time to seek leave to apply for judicial review of a visa officer's decision refusing a work permit based on misrepresentation regarding the genuineness of his marriage.

The Federal Court refused the extension of time because the applicant failed to justify the delay or show that extending the time would serve the interests of justice.

The Court noted that requests for an extension must be decided concurrently with the leave application.