Rylee Raeburn-Gibson

The applicant sought judicial review of a decision refusing his application for permanent residence under the Spouse or Common-law Partner in Canada class due to criminal inadmissibility.

The applicant alleged procedural fairness was breached because the officer failed to consider a request for an extension of time to file a rehabilitation application, which he claimed was sent via email.

The Court held that the applicant failed to establish that the extension request was properly received and pending before the officer, noting the lack of identifiers on the email, the absence of acknowledgement, and the lack of follow-up.

The application for judicial review was dismissed.

The applicant sought judicial review of a visa officer's decision finding him inadmissible to Canada on grounds of serious criminality under s. 36(1)(c) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, based on allegations that he assaulted his ex-wife with a weapon in Syria.

The applicant argued the process was procedurally unfair and the decision unreasonable because the officer relied on insufficient notice and failed to properly assess exculpatory evidence.

The Federal Court dismissed the application, finding that the procedural fairness letter provided sufficient notice of the case to meet and that the officer's assessment of the evidence, including the omission of a relied-upon passport page, was reasonable.

The applicant sought a stay of his removal to Iran pending his application for leave and judicial review of a refusal to defer his removal.

The applicant produced new documentary evidence of risk in Iran based on his sexual orientation.

The Court found the officer's treatment of the new evidence was problematic and failed to properly assess the risk.

Applying the tripartite test, the Court found a serious issue, irreparable harm if removed without a proper risk assessment, and that the balance of convenience favored the applicant.

The motion for a stay of removal was granted.