Date: 19980709
Docket: IMM-1789-97
BETWEEN:
IQBAL SINGH AUJLA
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
(Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario
on Thursday, July 9, 1998)
DÉCARY, J.:
[1] The visa officer, after interviewing the applicant, determined that he did not meet the requirements for admission to Canada as a Chef in a restaurant. She informed the applicant that he had not convinced her that he had the required minimum of one year experience. She gave him a total of 66 units, four short of the minimum of 70 required by section 9 of the Immigration Regulations, 1978. She allowed no unit with respect to "experience".
[2] In explaining in her refusal letter why she had not allowed any units for "experience", she wrote:
| |
Your letters of reference are not convincing and are mostly the type of letters which can easily be produced on a computer. I have attempted to contact Aux J. Frites Nouveau Restaurant in Montreal but am advised there is no such restaurant. I spoke with an employee of Chenab Restaurant in New York and he informed me that you were not known to him. |
|
[3] While I sympathize with the visa officer who clearly had disbelieved the applicant and told him so during the interview, and who clearly had made valiant efforts after the interview to ensure that her disbelief was well founded, the fact is, that she obtained, after the interview, evidence which was prejudicial to the applicant and which clearly affected the disposition of the case. She should, in the circumstances, have informed the applicant of the result of her independent inquiry and she should have allowed him to make representations. (See Mancia v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, A-75-97, May 1, 1998, F.C.A., unreported yet). It may well be that the applicant would not have been able to contradict the new evidence, but the Court cannot speculate at this stage as to what would have happened. The evidence at issue constituted the fatal blow against the applicant: fairness required that he be given an opportunity to respond.
[4] The application will be allowed, the decision of the visa officer will be set aside and the matter will be referred back to a different visa officer for a new interview and a new determination.
"Robert Décary"
J.A.
Toronto, Ontario
July 9, 1998
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
COURT NO: IMM-1789-97
| STYLE OF CAUSE: IQBAL SINGH AUJLA |
- and -
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
DATE OF HEARING: JULY 9, 1998
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: DÉCARY, J.
DATED: JULY 9, 1998
APPEARANCES:
Mr. Ian Wong
For the Applicant
Mr. Stephen Gold
For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
White, Wong & Associates
6 Adelaide Street East
10th Floor
Toronto, Ontario
M5C 1H6
For the Applicant
George Thomson
Deputy Attorney General
of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date: 19980709
Docket: IMM-1789-97
Between:
Applicant
- and -
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
Email this Content