Docket: IMM-6392-25
Citation: 2026 FC 244
Ottawa, Ontario, February 20, 2026
PRESENT: The Honourable Madam Justice Heneghan
|
BETWEEN: |
|
ROSALBA BOUCZAN LUCENA |
|
Applicant |
|
and |
|
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP & IMMIGRATION |
|
Respondent |
REASONS AND JUDGMENT
[1] Ms. Rosalba Bouczan Lucena (the “Applicant”
) seeks judicial review of the decision of an officer (the “Officer”
), refusing her application for permanent residence that was made on Humanitarian and Compassionate (“H and C”
) grounds, pursuant to subsection 25(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 (the “Act”
).
[2] In that decision, the Officer determined that the Applicant would not suffer disproportionate hardship if required to apply for permanent residence from outside Canada and that her establishment in Canada did not exceed what would normally be expected after spending some years in Canada.
[3] The Applicant is a citizen of Mexico. She entered Canada in June 2019 and sought refugee protection. She was unsuccessful and her application for leave and judicial review in respect of the negative decision of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Board, Refugee Appeal Division, was dismissed in June 2023.
[4] The Applicant submitted her H and C application on February 10, 2024. It was refused on January 16, 2025.
[5] The Applicant has several family members in Canada, that is five sons, a daughter-in-law, a daughter and granddaughter who is a Canadian citizen. One son has status in Canada as a protected person. The remaining family members have no status, with the exception of her granddaughter.
[6] Among other things, the Applicant argues that the Officer unreasonably found that her family ties in Canada are tenuous since only one child, a son, has status in Canada, as a “protected person”
. Her Canadian born grandchild has status but is likely to travel with her parents if they are removed from Canada.
[7] The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (the “Respondent”
) submits that the Officer reasonably considered the evidence and submissions before refusing the H and C application.
[8] Following the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov, [2019] 4 S.C.R. 653 (S.C.C.), the decision of the Officer is reviewable on the standard of reasonableness.
[9] In considering reasonableness, the Court is to ask if the decision under review “bears the hallmarks of reasonableness – justification, transparency and intelligibility – and whether it is justified in relation to the relevant factual and legal constraints that bear on the decision”
; see Vavilov, supra at paragraph 99.
[10] I am not satisfied that the Officer’s assessment of the Applicant’s establishment in Canada and potential hardship if required to apply for permanent residence from Mexico meets the standard of reasonableness. The Officer seemed to downplay the Applicant’s establishment in Canada and in my opinion, this approach affected consideration of the issue of hardship.
[11] In the result, the application for judicial review will be allowed, the decision of the Officer will be set aside and the matter remitted to a new officer for redetermination. There is no question for certification.
Email this Content