4 total
Judicial review allowed; officer's study permit refusal unintelligible and based on factual errors.
The applicant, an 18-year-old from Iran, applied for judicial review of an immigration officer's decision refusing her entry to Canada on a study permit.
The officer concluded they were not satisfied the applicant would leave Canada at the end of her stay.
The Federal Court allowed the application for judicial review, finding the officer's decision unintelligible, unjustified, and based on irrelevant considerations and a clear factual error regarding the applicant having family in Canada.
The matter was remitted to a different officer for redetermination.
Judicial review of permanent residence refusal dismissed; applicant lacked work experience at application date.
The applicant sought judicial review of a decision refusing his application for permanent residence under the Home Child Care Provider Pilot Program.
The application was refused because he lacked the required 24 months of full-time work experience at the time the application was made.
The applicant argued the work experience should be calculated from the time of processing and that working 40 hours per week satisfied the requirement faster.
The Federal Court dismissed the application, finding the Ministerial Instructions clearly required the 24 months to be completed before the application date, and no procedural fairness breach occurred.
Judicial review of study permit refusal granted where officer failed to explain reasoning.
The applicant applied for a study permit to pursue a diploma in Business Administration.
The visa officer refused the application, concluding the applicant would not leave Canada at the end of his stay based on his study plan, financial situation, and lack of ties to his home country.
The Federal Court granted the application for judicial review, finding the officer's analysis on all three factors unreasonable for failing to justify their conclusions and ignoring contrary evidence.
Judicial review granted; study permit refusal unreasonable for ignoring evidence and flawed reasoning.
The applicants sought judicial review of a visa officer's decision refusing a study permit for the primary applicant to pursue a Master's degree in Canada.
The officer was not satisfied the applicant would leave Canada at the end of his studies due to his family ties and the purpose of his visit.
The Federal Court granted the application, finding the officer's decision unreasonable.
The officer overlooked relevant evidence regarding the applicant's study plan, career prospects, and ties to Iran, and made flawed assumptions about his intention to return home simply because his wife was accompanying him.
