
Immigration & Refugee judgments from Canadian courts and tribunals, with a plain-English summary, the legal holding and frequently asked questions.
A person applied for a work permit but was found to have misrepresented their application by providing fraudulent documents. They challenged this finding in court, arguing it was unfair and unreasonable. The Federal Court dismissed their case, upholding the visa officer's decision based on fair procedures and reasonable grounds.
The Federal Court dismissed an appeal challenging a decision to reject an a person permanent residence application. The court ruled that the decision was reasonable as it thoroughly considered all evidence and arguments presented by the applicant.
The Federal Court dismissed an appeal challenging a refusal to grant permanent residency based on humanitarian and compassionate reasons. The court found that the decision was fair and followed proper procedures.
In a recent Federal Court decision, a judicial review application challenging a PRRA decision was dismissed. The court ruled that the PRRA decision was reasonable and procedurally fair, and that the claimant had not proven otherwise.
The Federal Court dismissed a claimant's application for judicial review of the refusal of her humanitarian and compassionate application for permanent residence, finding the decision reasonable and procedurally fair.
A court rejected an appeal against a PRRA decision, ruling that no new evidence of forward-facing risk had been presented since earlier decisions. This means the claimant's application for a person protection based on future risks in Nigeria was denied.
A Federal Court judge ruled that a decision denying an application for permanent residence based on humanitarian and compassionate grounds was unreasonable because it did not take into account the claimant's pregnancy and the best interests of their unborn child. The court ordered the case to be reviewed by another officer.
In this case, the Federal Court reviewed a decision by an immigration officer who refused a temporary resident visa. The court found that the refusal was unreasonable because the officer did not properly explain their reasoning or engage with the applicant's evidence.
The Federal Court dismissed an application for judicial review challenging the refusal of a work permit and visitor visa. The court found that the decision was reasonable because it clearly explained why the applicants were unlikely to return to their home country after visiting Canada.
The Federal Court granted a judicial review, overturning a decision because the officer failed to consider the pregnancy and unborn child of the applicant. The court ordered the case to be reconsidered by a different officer.
A person applied for judicial review after their work permit application was refused by an immigration officer. The Federal Court found that the officer’s decision to refuse the permit was fair and reasonable, dismissing the claimant's case.
The Federal Court granted judicial review because an immigration officer did not provide enough information about why they thought bank statements were fake when refusing visas. This denied the applicants a fair chance to explain themselves.
The Federal Court granted judicial review because the procedural fairness letter (PFL) did not clearly explain the immigration officer's concerns about the authenticity of the bank statement. This was seen as a breach of procedural fairness.
The Federal Court dismissed an application for judicial review challenging the refusal of a work permit. The Court found the decision was procedurally fair and reasonable, as the applicant failed to provide sufficient evidence of her spouse's employment in Canada.
The Federal Court dismissed an appeal against a decision made by the Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) regarding a family’s refugee claim from India. The court upheld a person’s conclusion that the applicants' claims lacked credibility due to inconsistencies and insufficient supporting evidence.