Date: 20031203
Docket: IMM-5038-02
Citation: 2003 FC 1416
Toronto, Ontario, December 3rd, 2003
Present: The Honourable Madam Justice Gauthier
BETWEEN:
SAIF SADIQ & NIDAH SADIQ
Applicants
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] The applicants, Saif Sadiq and Nidah Sadiq are from Pakistan. They arrived in Canada in July 1998 and their daughter Nayha Sadiq was born on October 13, 1998. After the refusal of their application for Convention Refugee Status and the issuance of a removal order in 1999, Mr. Sadiq obtained an employment authorisation valid until August 5, 2000. On July 31, 2000 on an exemption from the requirement to obtain a visa from outside of Canada based on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. This exemption was refused and this decision of the immigration officer is the subject of the present application for judicial review.
[2] In his reasons, the immigration officer reviews the evidence presented by the applicant with respect to their degree of establishment. More Partially, he notes that between July 1998 and June 2000, Mr. Sadiq worked continuously in different jobs as Pack-Press Operator, junior receiving clerk and quality controller. In June 2000, he started a garment business (Nayha Textiles) which generated a business income of $10,693 in 2000 and $18,232 in 2001. Apart from the two applicants, Nayha Textiles employs one, Canadian resident. The applicants also recently rented space and purchased some equipment to start a small scale garment manufacturing business.
[3] The officer notes that there is no evidence that the current employee would not be able to find alternate employment, or of any community involvement or upgrading of skills in Canada.
[4] He considers that i) the applicants have no family in Canada but their two families live in Pakistan. ii) Prior to coming to Canada, Mr. Sadiq was well established in Pakistan where he operated a garment business for 10 years.
[5] The officer expressly mentions that the Canadian born daughter is very young (3 ½ years) and that he is satisfied that she would not suffer any undue hardship by returning with her parents to Pakistan.
[6] Finally, he states that he is not satisfied that the winding down of Mr. Sadiq's business would constitute disproportionate and undue and undeserved hardship and concludes that he is not satisfied that the applicants situation is such to warrant the exemption they seek.
[7] The applicants submit that the officer focused too much on that the fact that their employee would be able to find alternate employment and not enough on the hardship they would suffer if they were to return to Pakistan. In that respect, they claim that his decision is based on an irrelevant consideration. They further submit that the officer failed to follow the applicable guidelines in assessing the degree of establishment and that he did not properly consider the best interest of their Canadian child.
[8] I will analyse the decision under review applying the standard of reasonableness simpliciter.
[9] The Court notes that in the letter accompanying their application for the exemption, the applicants themselves raised the fate of their employee as a factor to be considered by the immigration officer.
[10] There is no evidence that the officer gave any undue weight to this factor and I am satisfied that he was familiar with all the evidence presented to him, that he duly considered the degree of establishment as required by the applicable guidelines and that he was alert and alive to the interests of Nayha Sadiq. The Court notes with respect to the best interest of their child that the applicants never alerted the officer to any particular problem she would encounter by returning to Pakistan with them. Nor, did they present any evidence of potential hardship she would face.
[11] In light of the foregoing, I can only conclude that the decision contains no reviewable error.
[12] The parties did not raise any question for certification and this case involves no question of general importance.
[13] The application for judicial review is dismissed.
ORDER
THIS COURT ORDERS that the application for judicial review is dismissed.
J.F.C.
FEDERAL COURT
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
DOCKET: IMM-5038-02
STYLE OF CAUSE: NIDAH SADIQ ET AL
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND
IMMIGRATION
Respondent
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
DATE OF HEARING: DECEMBER 3, 2003
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER BY: GAUTHIER, J.
DATED: December 3, 2003
APPEARANCES BY:
Ms. Preevanda Sapru For the Applicant
Mr. Lorne McClenaghan For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Max Berger & Associates
Toronto, ON For the Applicant
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT
Date: 20031203
Docket: IMM-5038-02
BETWEEN:
SAIF SADIQ & NIDAH SADIQ
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND
IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER
Email this Content