Date: 19990806
Docket: IMM-3568-98
BETWEEN:
JUN JIE LI
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
GIBSON J.:
[1] These reasons arise out of an application for judicial review of a decision of a visa officer denying the applicant"s application for permanent residence in Canada. The decision of the visa officer is dated the 13th of May, 1998, the day after an interview was conducted with the applicant at the Canadian Embassy in Beijing.
[2] At the interview with the applicant, the visa officer determined the applicant"s ability in the official languages of Canada to be very limited. Indeed, the applicant relied on an interpreter.
[3] The visa officer wrote in his notes of the interview:Did not explore work duties in detail as points insufficient to pass...
[4] In the decision letter, the visa officer wrote:At the interview it was determined that you could read well, and speak and write English with difficulty. Since you were awarded 2 points for English, you were unable to obtain sufficient units of assessment for me to approve your application. Therefore, your qualifications and work duties were not assessed in detail.
There is no other occupation apparent on your application in which you or your spouse are qualified and experienced, and under which your application would be successful.
In Lau v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)1, Associate Chief Justice Jerome wrote:
I am not satisfied that the applicant was provided an appropriate opportunity to address the concerns of the visa officer regarding his work or training. ...
The applicant was not afforded an opportunity to make representations to the visa officer concerning his suitability for consideration under another designation and to explain the training he received.
In those circumstances, Associate Chief Justice Jerome allowed the applicant"s application for judicial review and set the visa officer"s decision aside.
[5] Precisely the same could be said here. The applicant passed a screening process and was invited to an interview. At the interview, he was entitled to a degree of procedural fairness. More particularly, he was entitled to have the visa officer put to him the visa officer"s concerns regarding the applicant"s application and to have an opportunity to respond to those concerns. It is of no consequence that his responses might very likely have failed to assuage the concerns of the visa officer.
[6] In the result, by reason of a denial of an appropriate degree of procedural fairness, this application for judicial review will be allowed. The decision of the visa officer will be set aside and the matter will be referred back to the respondent for redetermination by a different visa officer.
[7] No question will be certified, this being a matter that turns on the very specific facts at issue.
"Frederick E. Gibson"
JUDGE
TORONTO, ONTARIO
August 6, 1999
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
| COURT NO: IMM-3568-98 |
| STYLE OF CAUSE: JUN JIE LI |
| - and - |
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
| DATE OF HEARING: THURSDAY, AUGUST 5, 1999 |
| PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO |
| REASONS FOR ORDER BY: GIBSON J. |
DATED: FRIDAY, AUGUST 6, 1999
| APPEARANCES: Ms. Carla Sturdy |
For the Applicant
Ms. Geraldine MacDonald
For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Lewis & Associates
Barristers & Solicitors
175 Harbord Street
Toronto, Ontario
M5S 1H3
| For the Applicant |
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date:19990806
Docket: IMM-3568-98
Between:
| JUN JIE LI |
Applicant
- and -
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
__________________