Docket:
IMM-9123-12
Citation: 2013 FC 1057
Ottawa, Ontario, October
22, 2013
PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Phelan
|
BETWEEN:
|
|
SIEW LAN CHU
|
|
Applicant
|
|
and
|
|
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
|
|
Respondent
|
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT
[1]
This is a judicial review of a decision denying
permanent residence under the in Canada spousal class. The grounds for denial
is that there was no bona fide marriage.
[2]
The Applicant complains that the decision is
unreasonable because any discrepancies between the husband’s and wife’s
narratives were based upon a microscopic examination of the evidence. The
Applicant does not pursue the issue of translation nor could she succeed.
[3]
The Officer found four areas of contradictory
evidence for which there were inadequate explanations:
•
whether they had cohabited before marriage;
•
inconsistent descriptions of the marriage
proposal circumstances;
•
inconsistent description of the post-marriage
ceremony events; and
•
the husband’s admission that he did not know his
wife’s first language.
[4]
The applicable standard of review is
reasonableness (Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency
Preparedness) v Chen, 2013 FC 215.
[5]
While not argued, the attempt to introduce
additional affidavit evidence cannot be allowed as none of them meet the
criteria in Assn. of Universities and Colleges of Canada v Canadian
Copyright Licensing Agency, 2012 FCA 22, 428 NR 297.
[6]
I can find nothing unreasonable about this
decision. It falls within the range of decisions reasonably available in light
of the record. The contradictions related to highly relevant matters – such as
the first language of a spouse.
[7]
The fact that the Applicant and her spouse
answered a number of questions correctly is less important than that they had
major issues with four important matters. The decision is not based upon some
form of score-card.
[8]
Therefore, this judicial review will be
dismissed. There is no question for certification.
Email this Content