Zofia Rogowska

The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness sought judicial review of two decisions of the Immigration Division ordering the release of the respondent, who had been detained pursuant to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

The ID had found that the respondent's harsh conditions of detention, including prolonged isolation during a COVID-19 outbreak, warranted his release, despite acknowledging he posed a danger to the public and a flight risk.

The Federal Court allowed the applications for judicial review, finding that while the ID's assessment of the factors favouring release was not unreasonable, its failure to impose conditions to mitigate the danger the respondent posed to the public made the release decisions unreasonable.

The applicants, a mother and son from China, sought judicial review of a decision refusing their application for permanent residence on humanitarian and compassionate (H&C) grounds.

The Federal Court allowed the application, finding that the immigration officer's assessment of the best interests of the child (BIOC) was unreasonable.

The officer made findings not supported by the evidence and based on speculation regarding the son's ability to reintegrate into the Chinese education system and the benefits of family reunification with his estranged father.

Although a BIOC assessment is not necessarily determinative of an H&C application, the flawed analysis in this case undermined the reasonableness of the overall decision.

The applicants, a mother and adult son from Nigeria, sought judicial review of a Refugee Appeal Division decision that denied their refugee claims on the basis of a viable internal flight alternative.

The mother feared persecution from her in-laws for refusing to allow her daughter to undergo female genital mutilation, and the son feared persecution by a cult.

The Federal Court found the RAD's determination that the applicants had a viable IFA in either Abuja or Port Harcourt to be reasonable, as they failed to demonstrate that the agents of persecution had the means and motivation to pursue them or that relocation would be objectively unreasonable.

The application for judicial review was dismissed.