Date: 20000622
Docket: IMM-1355-99
BETWEEN:
LAKSHAPATHY KALUM UDANA GUNARATHNA
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
DAWSON J.
[1] Mr. Gunarathna, the applicant herein, is a 35 year old citizen of Sri Lanka.
[2] In July of 1996, he applied for permanent residence in Canada pursuant to the "Independent Selection Category" for skilled workers. He applied as a "Law Clerk" as defined in the then relevant Canadian Classification and Dictionary of Occupations ("CCDO") under occupation number 2349-114.
[3] This is the second application for judicial review of a decision of a visa officer brought by Mr. Gunarathna in respect of his application for permanent residence.
[4] The first application for judicial review was allowed on consent. At issue in that proceeding was the propriety of the visa officer"s assessment of the applicant"s personal suitability factor.
[5] Pursuant to the order of this Court setting aside that decision, Mr. Gunarathna attended a second interview with a different visa officer for a redetermination of his application for permanent residence.
[6] That officer determined that Mr. Gunarathna"s application for permanent residence should be refused.
[7] In this proceeding, Mr. Gunarathna seeks an order quashing that decision and remitting the matter to a different visa officer for redetermination.
[8] At issue in this proceeding is whether the visa officer made a reviewable error in assessing Mr. Gunarathna"s English language skills and whether the visa officer made a reviewable error in her assessment of his personal suitability factor.
[9] Despite the able argument of Mr. Gunarathna"s counsel, I am satisfied that the visa officer committed no reviewable error in refusing Mr. Gunarathna"s application for permanent residence.
[10] In oral argument, counsel for Mr. Gunarathna did not pursue the argument that based upon the assessment of the first visa officer, the issue of language assessment was res judicata.
[11] With respect to the assessment at issue, Mr. Gunarathna failed to adduce persuasive evidence that the visa officer exercised her discretion with respect to the assessment of his language ability in an unreasonable fashion. The fact that her assessment differed from the assessment of the first visa officer does not, of itself, make her assessment unreasonable or wrong.
[12] Similarly, I am not persuaded that the visa officer"s assessment of Mr. Gunarathna"s personal suitability was unreasonable, or not properly founded on the record before her.
[13] For these reasons, the application is dismissed.
[14] Counsel were in agreement that there is no question for certification.
"Eleanor R. Dawson"
Judge
Ottawa, Ontario
June 22, 2000