English 
Français 
Español 
العربية 
Português 
Русский 
2015-01-29 | 2015 FC 113 | IMM-1261-14 Jalil v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) Principle Established When a visa officer emphasizes a permanent residency applicant’s weak language skills in a decision, this does not necessarily mean that the officer is requiring the applicant to prove that she will be able to economically establish herself in Canada immediately upon
January Azevedo v Canada (Governor General) Ebi v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) Ijaz v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) El-Husseini c Canada (Citoyenneté et Immigration) Jalil v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) Lachica v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) February Miji c Canada (Citoyenneté et Immigration) Song v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) Ma v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)
2015-02-06 | 2015 FC 159 | IMM-5959-14 Ma v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) Principle Established An application is officially received by CIC only when all required documents are received. S. 10(5) of the IRPR applies to inland spousal sponsorship agreements CIC does not owe a duty of procedural fairness regarding an application that has been set aside
2015-02-12 | 2015 FC 172 | IMM-5323-13 Barua v Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) Principle Established: A foreign national applying for a work permit with the intention of eventually becoming a permanent resident can be validly excluded from Canada if it seems likely that he will not leave Canada upon the expiration of his work permit.
IMM-5726-08 2009 FC 935 September 21, 2009 Principle Established: Responsibility of advising email address change is on applicant Applicant is a citizen of India who applied for permanent residency under the skilled-worker class. Included with her application was an authorization to deal with her representative. During the process, the representative sent a fax to the
IMM-2620-09 2009 FC 1131 November 5, 2009 Principle Established: Information from personal interviews are as important as documentary evidence The Applicant is a citizen of India who came to Canada in 2000 on a work permit. His work permit extension was refused and he continued working illegally in Canada for 7 years. In December 2008
IMM-2658-09 2009 FC 1234 December 3, 2009 Principle Established: Visa officers must be clear when using standard form letters of refusal. The applicant has been studying in Canada as an international student between 2004 and 2006. She took a break for approximately two years and then returned to Canada in May 2008 to pursue her
2010 FC 352 IMM-1525-09 March 31, 2010 Principle Established: It’s the reception date that counts. The applicant mailed her PR application on February 25, 2008 and it was received by the visa office responsible for processing on March 3, 2008. On February 27, 2008, Immigration Canada changed its regulations. Under the previous regulations, the applicant
IMM-4135-09 2010 FC 339 March 29, 2010 Principle Established: Need to make timely disclose of family members The applicant entered Canada as a refugee and obtained permanent resident status under humanitarian and compassionate grounds. He declared in his application that he was unaware of the whereabouts of his wife and daughter because of hostilities in
IMM-4442-09 2010 FC 212 February 23, 2010 Principle Established: Work Permit refused because applicant will likely not leave Canada. The applicant was a citizen of India who was denied a Temporary Work Permit on two occasions because he did not demonstrate sufficient ties to his home country and that he would not leave Canada after
