
Immigration & Refugee judgments from Canadian courts and tribunals, with a plain-English summary, the legal holding and frequently asked questions.
A Federal Court judge overturned an immigration decision refusing a work permit application. The court ruled that the decision was unreasonable because it did not adequately consider the applicant's academic opportunities and family obligations in Iran.
A court ruling has overturned a previous decision that took away someone’s a person. The Federal Court found this decision was not fair because it didn't properly consider important facts or respond well to key arguments presented by the person seeking refuge.
The Federal Court upheld a visa officer's decision to refuse a work permit to a foreign worker. The officer determined that the applicant was not financially stable in India and had strong ties to Canada, making it unlikely that the applicant would return home after the work permit expired.
In this case, the Federal Court granted the claimant’s request for judicial review of a a person decision. The court ruled that the decision was unfair because it did not properly consider all relevant evidence submitted by the claimant.
The Federal Court dismissed an application for judicial review challenging a decision denying refugee status to applicants from Rwanda. The court found that inconsistencies in their evidence and testimonies undermined their credibility, failing to establish persecution or risk under sections 96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
The Federal Court dismissed a claimant's application for judicial review, upholding an immigration officer's decision to deny permanent residence due to insufficient evidence of a genuine spousal relationship. The court found the officer's decision was both procedurally fair and reasonable.
The Federal Court rejected a worker's appeal regarding a denied work permit application. The court ruled that the worker did not provide enough proof of education or work experience to meet the necessary requirements for the work permit.
The Federal Court granted a judicial review of an immigration officer's decision to deny a couple's work permit applications. The court found the officer's analysis of the applicants' business plan and family ties to be insufficient and unreasonable.
A person seeking permanent residency through spousal sponsorship was denied due to past criminal convictions. The Federal Court allowed a judicial review application, highlighting that immigration officers must consider humanitarian factors and the best interests of children when making decisions.
A person seeking permanent residency in Canada had their application denied because they did not provide enough proof of a real marriage to their spouse. When they challenged this decision in court, it was upheld due to lack of evidence addressing concerns about the spouse's other relationships.
The Federal Court allowed an application for judicial review of an immigration officer's decision refusing a spousal sponsorship application. The Court found the officer's decision unreasonable because it did not adequately consider the humanitarian and compassionate grounds presented by the applicant.
A person applied for a work permit but was denied because they did not have enough proof of their qualifications or experience. They tried to challenge this decision in court, but the judge agreed with the immigration officer's refusal and dismissed the case.
A federal judge reviewed a decision by an immigration officer who refused to grant work permits for a couple planning to open a beauty a person in Canada. The judge agreed with the applicants that the officer's reasons did not make sense and granted their request for judicial review, sending the case back to another officer.
In a recent Federal Court decision, the judge ruled that an immigration officer's decision was unreasonable due to procedural unfairness and flawed reasoning, including improper dismissal of credible evidence and improper credibility assessments.
The claimant requested the Federal Court to review a a person appeal decision but was unsuccessful. The court upheld the original decision using the 'reasonableness' standard for reviewing administrative decisions, unless there are specific legal reasons not to do so.
The Federal Court found an a person (a person) officer's decision to be unreasonable when they refused a foreign national’s application for permanent residence based on spousal sponsorship. The court set aside the decision and ordered it to be reviewed again by another a person officer.