Federal Court Decisions

Date: 20001204

Docket: IMM-2216-00

BETWEEN:      EJAZ ZAHER BREICH

     Applicant

     AND:

     THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

     AND IMMIGRATION

    

     Respondent

     REASONS FOR ORDER

TREMBLAY-LAMER J.:

[1]      The Applicant filed an application for judicial review with respect to a decision of a visa officer dated March 2, 2000 rejecting his application for permanent residence in Canada.

[2]      The Applicant, Mr. Ejaz Zaher Breich, is a citizen of Lebanon.

[3]      He made an application for permanent residence in Canada which was received at the Canadian Embassy in Damascus, Syria on November 29, 1998.

[4]      The Applicant's intended occupation in Canada was Electrical Electronics Engineering Technician NOC 2241.

[5]      He was given 59 units of assessment.

[6]      He was not given the 13 units for the factor Education because, although he was holding a technical baccalaureate in electricity, he did not complete any college or university program.

[7]      The Applicant submits that the Visa Officer failed to act fairly. He should have given to the Applicant the opportunity to disabuse him and to respond to his negative findings. I disagree. There was no obligation to call the Applicant for an interview to clarify an ambiguous application.

[8]      I fully endorse the words of my colleague Rothstein J. in Mohammad v. M.C.I., (1995) 90 F.T.R. 310 where he said:

Nor was there an obligation on the Visa Officer to call in the applicant for an interview to clarify the applicant's reference to his capacity in French. Applicant's counsel could not point to any provisions of the Immigration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. 1-2 or Regulations that placed such an obligation on the Visa Officer. Although counsel relied on the principles of natural justice, I cannot see how the Visa Officer breached any such principles. Essentially, what he argued is that when an applicant for permanent residence completes his application in an ambiguous manner he must be called in to clarify it. If this were correct, applicants who completed their applications ambiguously would have the benefit of a personal interview, while those who completed them clearly, would not. Such a result would be anomalous to say the least. There was no breach of natural justice by the Visa Officer.

[9]      For these reasons, the application for judicial review is dismissed.

     "Danièle Tremblay-Lamer"

                 Judge

MONTREAL, QUEBEC

December 4, 2000