Stewart Sharma Harsanyi Immigration Law Firm Blog

Testifying as an expert witness in Canadian Immigration

For a change I was in the position of answering questions and subjected to cross examination. An international family, custody litigation case required an expert opinion as to the efforts of a GB/UK national that sought entry to the US and then Canada to see his child. He has been stymied in his efforts to enter either country. I never imagined that I'd have to travel to Springfield Missouri for any reason, much less to testify; this week has been difficult given my appearance before the IAD in Winnipeg on a spousal appeal hearing on Monday, and then flying to Springfield on Thursday. My testimony wrapped up this afternoon. It was a unique opportunity and I'm grateful for this experience. Unfortunately litigation is often a consequence to the break down of a marriage. Sadly, emotion trumps logic in matters involving the end of a relationship, particularly where children are involved. I'm glad I'm not a family law lawyer! I don't know the end result for my client. That's ultimately out of my hands. I hope I was able to provide the necessary information to the Court for its considered judgment. I have a feeling that no matter the result, it... Read more →

Spousal Sponsorship Interviews and Appeals

Another day another immigration appeal hearing. This last was in Winnipeg; my client was married in 2013; application was refused by CHC Delhi in 2015; now 4 years after the marriage, success. In many spousal interviews, the applicant is damned if s/he does and damned if s/he doesn't. In this case the visa officer in Delhi had concerns that my client's husband knew (detailed) answers to his/her questions -apparently this raised a red flag and this was one of the reasons the application was refused. This is of course a no win scenario. When overseas applicants don't know enough of their Canadian sponsors, the application is refused, and when they do know, it still gets refused. In this case, the Officer found that the Applicant's precise answers regarding key dates indicate that he memorized information. More specifically, during the interview in New Delhi, the Officer notes the following: “When interviewed he demonstrates that he knows some information by heart. He knows precise dates by heart.” The Officer castigated the applicant for his accurate recollection of the key dates surrounding the marriage, rather than weighing it as evidence to support the genuineness of their relationship. The Officer places the Applicant in... Read more →

Sample Overview: Federal Court - Judicial Review of Refused Visitor Visa

Overview This is an application for judicial review of a decision of a visa officer in New Delhi, India denying the Applicant a temporary resident visa. The officer stated that he or she was not satisfied that the Applicant would return to India at the end of the period authorized by his stay. The reasons are simply that "file reviewed. Applicant has limited to no travel history. I'm not satisfied that the applicants would leave Canada at the end of their authorized stay. Refused." The officer did not request the Applicant to attend an interview or examination prior to refusing that application. It is patently unreasonable to conclude that because this was the Applicant's first international journey that he would not return. Putting an Applicant in a catch-22 position is not reasonable. The Applicant can't get a TRV to Canada because he has no travel history; he can't accumulate or build up travel history because he can't get a TRV. Read more →