Date: 20011121
Docket: IMM-5210-00
Neutral citation: 2001 FCT 1278
BETWEEN:
JATINDER SINGH CHADHA
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
[1] In her letter of refusal to the applicant, the visa officer stated that his application for permanent residence was considered under four occupations. She determined that the applicant either did not meet the employment requirements or perform the essential duties for these occupations.
[2] However, for the occupations of Purchasing Agent and Marketing Manager, the applicant was awarded full points for experience despite the visa officer's concerns that the relevant main duties in these two job classifications had not been performed. She expressed herself as follows:
I have awarded you full points for experience in this occupation, even if at your interview, I was not satisfied that the duties that you performed are a substantial amount of the main duties, including the essential ones, as described under the NOC for this occupation.
I also assessed you as a Marketing Manager, and even if I am not satisfied that the duties that you performed are those as described under the NOC for this occupation, I awarded you full points for experience, but you also failed, as at present, there is no demand for this occupation in Canada.
[3] The visa officer completed her review of the application for permanent residence by awarding the applicant four points for personal suitability. The total units of assessment were sixty-eight. In this application for judicial review, the sole issue is whether the visa officer erred in her assessment under the personal suitability factor.
[4] The applicant's principal argument is that the visa officer's assessment of his personal suitability was unreasonable in view of his continuous employment in different jobs with an increasing level of income over a twelve-year period in the United States, his success in his stock market investments and his ability to establish himself in the North American environment.
[5] According to the Immigration Regulations, 1978, units of assessment are awarded on the basis of the interview to reflect the applicant's personal suitability to become successfully established in Canada based on the person's adaptability, motivation, initiative, resourcefulness and other similar qualities. In my view, this involves an evaluation of factors which are not limited to the applicant's financial status.
[6] In Kompanets v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2000), 6 Imm.L.R. (3d) 107 (T.D.), Justice MacKay stated (at paragraph 11): "Reasonable people may disagree on the points awarded, but significant deference must be accorded to the visa officer's discretionary finding of fact." I respectfully agree.
[7] Upon my review of the tribunal record and after considering the able submissions of the applicant's counsel, I have not been persuaded that the visa officer's finding on personal suitability and her reasons to support that finding disclose any reviewable error.
[8] Accordingly, this application for judicial review will be dismissed. Neither party suggested the certification of a serious question.
"Allan Lutfy"
A.C.J.
Ottawa, Ontario
November 21, 2001