Docket: IMM-2646-25
Citation: 2026 FC 474
Toronto, Ontario, April 9, 2026
PRESENT: The Honourable Justice Battista
|
BETWEEN: |
|
ASLOOB ARMUGHAN |
|
Applicant |
|
and |
|
THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY
AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS |
|
Respondent |
JUDGMENT AND REASONS
(delivered orally from the bench on April 9, 2026)
[1] The Applicant challenges the decision of the Refugee Protection Division (RPD) to cease his refugee protection status pursuant to section 108(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27 [IRPA]. The RPD’s decision was based on the Applicant’s renewal of his Pakistani passport on three occasions, combined with his use of that passport to return to Pakistan on six occasions representing 193 days there cumulatively.
[2] The Applicant’s sole argument is that the RPD unreasonably failed to assess his lack of subjective knowledge that his actions could result in the revocation of his Canadian status.
[3] However, it is clear from the decision that the Applicant’s lack of understanding of the consequences of his actions was thoroughly considered and analyzed by the RPD. After doing so, the RPD cited and relied upon Federal Court of Appeal jurisprudence which confirmed that an Applicant’s lack of knowledge of potential consequences is not determinative but is only one factor to be considered in rebutting the presumption of reavailment (Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v Galindo Camayo, 2022 FCA 50 at para 84).
[4] Ultimately, the RPD placed greater emphasis on other factors, such as the lack of exceptional circumstances explaining his multiple returns to Pakistan, the length of time he remained there, his evidence regarding his lack of subjective fear, and how he conducted himself during his visits. It was reasonable for the RPD to determine that the presumption of reavailment was not rebutted, and to grant the application for cessation.
Email this Content