Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content


Date: 19980716


Docket: IMM-286-98

    

BETWEEN

     FARSHAD FARSHIDFAR

     Applicant

     - and -

     THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

     Respondent

     REASONS FOR ORDER

McDONALD, J.A.

[1]      The application for judicial review is allowed. The finding of the Visa Officer that the applicant should be awarded 0 points for his English language ability is patently unreasonable in light of the evidence. The applicant was requested to write out in English a description of what his job functions are as an Auditor. The applicant wrote out the following description:

             I am internal auditor. As an internal auditor, we check the accuracy all documents and activities departments in my organization.             
             There are two parts:             
             - on if is the auditing of the financial operation             
             - on of is the auditing of the rule and regulation             
             I mean, the same rule of an auditor in North America, When I check financial departments as accounting departments, we check and examin and test all of documents as vouchers, financial statements and ledgers and whatever. When we check adminestration department: we check 'the way' they are performed and the accuracy of all activities with rule and regulation. I am an internal auditor and this is my role. Thank you.             

[2]      The Visa Officer also did not test the applicant's reading comprehension. It is clear from the above written statement that the applicant had a reasonable ability to write in the English language and the zero assessment, is, in my view, a perverse finding.

[3]      The application for judicial review is allowed. The matter is referred back to a different Visa Officer for a re-determination of the applicant's application for permanent residence.

                             "F.J. McDonald"

                                 J.A.

Toronto, Ontario

July 16, 1998

     FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

     Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record

COURT NO:                          IMM-286-98

STYLE OF CAUSE:                      FARSHAD FARSHIDFAR

                             - and -

                             THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

                            

DATE OF HEARING:                  JULY 16, 1998

PLACE OF HEARING:                  TORONTO, ONTARIO

REASONS FOR ORDER BY:              McDONALD, J.A.

DATED:                          JULY 16, 1998

APPEARANCES:                     

                             Ms. Shoshana Green

                                 For the Applicant

                             Mr. David Tyndale

                                 For the Respondent

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:              Green & Spiegel

                             Barristers & Solicitors

                             Box 114

                             Standard Life Centre

                             200-121 King Street West

                             Toronto, Ontario

                             M5H 3T9

                            

                                 For the Applicant

                              George Thomson

                             Deputy Attorney General

                             of Canada

                                 For the Respondent


                            

                             FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

                                 Date: 19980716

                        

         Docket: IMM-300-98

                             Between:

                             FARSHAD FARSHIDFAR

     Applicant

                             - and -

                             THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

                        

     Respondent

                    

                            

            

                                                                                     REASONS FOR ORDER

                            


 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.