Date: 19980416
Docket: IMM-2617-97
BETWEEN:
ABDUL RAUF
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
HEALD, D.J.
[1] This is an application for judicial review of the decision of Visa Officer Sara Trillo dated June 13, 1997 an Immigration Officer at the office of the Canadian Consulate General in New York. By that decision, the applicant's application for permanent residence in Canada was refused.
Facts
[2] The applicant is a citizen of Pakistan. He came to the U.S.A. in 1993 with a false passport. He remained in the U.S.A. without any legal status. The applicant applied for permanent residence in Canada at the office of the Canadian Consulate General in Buffalo, New York on June 14, 1996. His application was as an Independent applicant pursuant to the skilled workers program. Such applicants are assessed and processed pursuant to the points system. This applicant was assessed as follows:
Factor Units
Age 10
Occupational demand 05
Vocational preparation 15
Experience 06
Demographic Factor 08
Education 10
English 06
French 00
Personal Suitability 05
Total 65
Pursuant to the Regulations in force at the time, an applicant must obtain at least 70 points of assessment to be granted status as a permanent resident. Since the applicant only obtained 65 points, his application for permanent residence was refused.
The Applicant's Submissions
[3] In counsel's submission, the visa officer should have awarded the applicant 13 points, rather than 10 points, for the Education factor. Counsel makes this submission because it is alleged that the applicant completed a "three year full-time college diploma". Counsel's further submission is that 3 additional points should have been awarded for fluency in speaking, writing and reading English. In counsel's view, these six additional points would have produced a total of 71 points, or one point in excess of the required minimum. The applicant makes the further submission that points should have been awarded for experience and personal suitability.
Analysis
[4] In my view, the applicant's submissions supra are without merit. The affidavit of Visa Officer Sara Trillo establishes that the applicant does not have a college diploma. He has rather a certificate from a higher secondary program which would entitle the applicant to enter a college or university. The Trillo affidavit further establishes that the holder of such a certificate should only be awarded ten units of assessment under the education factor1.
[5] With respect to the language fluency criterion, I conclude that the visa officer was clearly justified in deciding that he was unable to award the applicant the total number of units for fluency in English. He noted that the applicant was able to speak and read English well but not fluently. He added that "he writes English with difficulty". To support this view, a copy of the applicant's written English is attached as Exhibit B to his affidavit. A perusal of Exhibit B makes it perfectly clear that the visa officer was not exaggerating in any way in concluding that the applicant "writes English with difficulty".
[6] The applicant also challenges the visa officer's conclusions with respect to experience and personal suitability. In my view, these conclusions were reasonably open to him based on the reasons set out in his detailed affidavit2. As observed by counsel for the respondent, counsel for the applicant chose not to cross-examine on that affidavit.
Conclusion
[7] For the foregoing reasons, i have concluded that the within application for judicial review should be dismissed.
Certification
[8] Neither counsel suggested that a serious question of general importance is involved in the circumstances of this case. I agree. Accordingly, no question is certified.
"Darrel V. Heald"
D.J.
Toronto, Ontario
April 16, 1998
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
COURT NO: IMM-2617-97
| STYLE OF CAUSE: ABDUL RAUF |
- and -
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
DATE OF HEARING: APRIL 16, 1998
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: HEALD, D.J.
DATED: APRIL 16, 1998
APPEARANCES:
Mr. Yossi Schwartz
For the Applicant
Mr. Brian Frimeth
For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Roach, Schwartz & Associates
Barristers and Solicitors
688 St. Clair Avenue West
Toronto, Ontario
M6C 1B1
For the Applicant
George Thomson
Deputy Attorney General
of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date: 19980416
Docket: IMM-2617-97
Between:
Applicant
- and -
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
__________________
1 See paragraph 22 of the affidavit of Sara Trillo - Respondent's Application Record, page 7.
2 See Respondent's Record - pp. 1-10.
Email this Content