Stewart Sharma Harsanyi Immigration Law Firm Blog

Massive drop in refugee referrals

Changes to Canada's immigration and refugee system have resulted in a massive drop to refugee claims made inside Canada. These changes include economic disincentives that include weeks to have a claim determined instead of years, removal of failed refugees within a year, restriction of other (duplicative) avenues to remain here and denial of health care benefits and work permits to those from designated safe countries. Read more →

The shifting sands of immigration law

Immigration, citizenship and refugee law and procedure can appear perplexing, given the multifaceted policy considerations and the discretionary latitude afforded to decision-makers. The legally recognized paths into Canada also shift disconcertingly... Read more →

Immigration Detention Review

A foreign national who had made a refugee claim in Canada was detained on the grounds of identity. The refugee claim was made in one name, but a fingerprint search resulted in a match for a claim in the UK under a different name. She was released on a bond and terms and conditions by the Immigration Division on a 48 hour review. Read more →

Where you make a refugee claim apparently matters...

Reading Justice Shore's decision in Divas v. MCI. [http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/en/2013/2013fc182/2013fc182.html] Justice Shore seems to suggest that it matters where you make your refugee claim seemingly making an adverse inference that the refugee claimant did not make a claim at the border, instead filing one in-land: [5]...Further, the fact that he did not make a refugee claim at a border post on arriving in Canada, but rather after he had crossed the border illegally adds to the inherent weaknesses of his application before this Court. I am unaware of any other judicial authority for this position. There may be a perfectly good reason why a refugee claim was not made at the border. Read more →

A "shameful, sham" sponsorship appeal

The Immigration Appeal Division dismissed a clearly unmeritorious appeal against a refused sponsorship visa. Read more →

You need to do it right the first time...

You usually don't get a do-over in immigration. If you fail to provide proper supporting documentation for your application, the visa officer is entitled to reject your application. Seeking judicial review is probably a waste of money. The visa officer is not entitled to inform you that he or she is not satisfied with the documents. See Liu v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2006 FC 1025 at para 16 where it is stated that[A]n applicant’s failure to provide adequate, sufficient or credible proof with respect to his visa application does not trigger a duty to inform the applicant in order for him to submit further proof to address the finding of the officer with respect to the inadequacy, deficiency or lack of credibility. . . . Read more →

Varga v. MCI - Justice Rennie calls foul on Refugee Protection Division Member

The Refugee Protection Division Member engaged in clearly improper questioning of a Roma woman and her children. The Federal Court was unimpressed and set aside the decision and remitting it back for reconsideration by a different member. Read more →

Federal Court decision - Ghannadi v MCI - reasonableness of visa officer's assessment of employer letter

An applicant's Federal Skilled Worker application was rejected on the basis that his job letter too closely mirrored the NOC descriptions. The Federal Court set aside the decision, finding the reasoning unacceptable. Read more →

Mahmoud Mohammad Issa Mohammad deported from Canada

Mahmoud Mohammad Issa Mohammad, a convicted terrorist, was finally deported from Canada after spending a quarter century here.The wheels of justice grind slowly. While he was determined to be a terrorist and inadmissible under the previous Immigration Act back in 1987, Mahmoud somehow staved off his removal from this country.The reasons for these delays, at least initially, were allegations that he would be at risk upon return. Canada's laws restrict refoulement or return of individuals facing personalized risk.At the end of the day, Mohammad has had multiple levels of review with full access to the panoply of rights accorded to him by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Due process, and justice, have been served.One can surmise, given his unique circumstances, he has had access to immigration tribunals, the Federal Court of Canada, and sought other, legal, recourses to remain in Canada. He was entitled to do so and he cannot be faulted for availing himself of these options. There is no doubt that the system is also likely to blame for any delay in removal. Jason Kenney's reforms to his department will likely prevent a repeat of this outlier case (as an aside, it remains to be seen whether the balance is tipped too far). Individuals will have refugee hearings in weeks, not years and removal proceedings are now initiated after that claim has been rejected. Access to other options has been restricted. Canadians respect due process, but do not respect an abuse of our process. Read more →

2013 National lmmigration Law Conference - Federal Court Practice Management Session

Justice Snider of the Federal Court provides her thoughts on Federal Court practice. Read more →

2013 National Immigration Law Conference - Justice Barnes

Justice Barnes provides his thoughts on handling medical inadmissibility cases. He finds that overseas visa officers have a tendency to go through the motion; they are not doing an individualized assessment as required by case law. Also, visa officers tend to disregard affidavits and letters indicating support. Finally, he counsels lawyers to not cut corners and have a solid plan. Read more →

2013 National Immigration Law Conference - Medical Inadmissibility

Immigration lawyer Chantal Desloges has written a paper for the session. She notes that "common health conditions, such as diabetes, have led to inadmissibility determinations". Read more →

Western Canada Refugee Protection and RAD Member List

Western Region Member List RPD - New Negar Azmudeh Douglas Cryer Kerry Cundal Jesse Davidson Lisa Rae Devries Sukhbir (Barry) Dhillon Paula Faber Michal Mivasair Jodie Schmalzbauer Daniel Tucci Colleen Zuk RPD - "Legacy" Rena Dhir Bindu Narula Lucinda Bruin Preeti Adhopia Luella Gaultier Gordon McRae RAD Philip MacAulay Douglas Fortney Read more →

More changes coming from Citizenship and Immigration Canada

CIC has just announced that proposed regulatory changes are to be published to reduce the maximum age for dependent children to under 19, rather than under 22 as at present. They also plan to remove the exception for full-time students. Their rationale is economic - younger dependants do better economically. http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/media/backgrounders/2013/2013-05-10a.asp They are also proposing tougher requirements for sponsoring parents and grandparents: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/media/backgrounders/2013/2013-05-10b.asp and http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/media/backgrounders/2013/2013-05-10.asp Read more →

2013 National Immigration Law Conference - Breach to Residency Obligation

I've done a number of these residency appeals. My most recent case involved was an interesting one where the appellant was not actually provided with the decision and therefore was essentially found to be a nullity. I've taken 2 other cases that were refused by Ms. Kashi Mattu to the Federal Court and succeeded in having them remitted for reconsideration after errors were found by the Court or admitted by the Department of Justice. Read more →

2013 National Immigration Law Conference - Criminal Inadmissibility

Bjorn and I decided to attend the session on criminal inadmissibility. Peter Edelmann is on the panel; he's a bit of a kindred spirit, doing immigration litigation and appearing in criminal courts as well. In keeping with Lorne Waldman's comments during the plenary, compassion has been removed from the system at least when it comes to criminals. If a PR is convicted of a crime in Canada, it's become harder to remain in Canada because the proposed law extinguishes the current ability to seek equitable relief before the IAD. Further, if a PR commits a crime outside Canada that is equivalent to one in Canada that could have resulted in a sentence of 10 yrs or more, that person is denied an ability to seek relief at the IAD. As I have written in the past, this law throws the baby out with the bath water. It does not make any distinction as to the nature of offence, just the length of the sentence. It does not make any distinction between a long term PR and one that showed up yesterday. Canadians don't like criminals (who does?); but this one strike and you're out is bad policy and will cause... Read more →

Most recent statistics from the RPD

Thought you might be interested in this. Quarterly stats (at the bottom) are interesting. Here is some information from the local IRB meeting in Montreal, 23 April 2013: Question: If a claimant submits the BOC a day or so late, what happens at the "special hearing"? What should the claimant expect? Answer: The RPD will decide whether to declare the claim abandoned based on principles of natural justice. The claimant should explain the reasons for the delay. Arguments should be related to natural justice. If possible the claimant should give notice to the RPD before the BOC deadline to explain that the BOC is coming (or better still ask for an extension). Question: Are the security checks mostly being received in time for scheduled hearings? What happens if they are not done by the hearing date? Answer: If the security checks are not completed 5 days before the hearing, the hearing is postponed (indefinitely). Currently this is an issue in only a minority of cases. The hearing will be rescheduled after the security check is completed. If the security check is not completed after 6 months, a hearing will be scheduled but CIC can still argue that it should be... Read more →