Imran v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), docket IMM-3552-97

Email this Content

Citations
docket IMM-3552-97

Case tabs

Text of decision

Date: 19980728

Docket: IMM-3552-97

BETWEEN:

RASHID IMRAN

Applicant

- and -

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

Respondent

REASONS FOR ORDER

LINDEN, J.A.

[1] This application of which the hearing was conducted by teleconference pursuant to a request by Ms. Codina, counsel for the applicant, who was in New York City and unable to attend in person or by agent, involves an attempt to quash a decision of an immigration officer refusing an immigration visa to the applicant. The main disagreement was about the experience and the qualifications of the applicant as a diesel mechanic. The immigration officer, in a letter dated June 23, 1997, indicated that she was not persuaded that the applicant possessed the training and experience to qualify as a diesel mechanic, in spite of some documentary evidence that was furnished by him.

[2] She found that he was only qualified to be classified as a mechanic's helper, an occupation which earned 0 units and barred him from admission. Ms. Codina contended that this was in error and that, in any event, other alternative occupation should have been considered. The applicant, however, based his application on the claim that he was a diesel mechanic.

[3] On the basis of the interview and the other evidence, the officer was not persuaded that he was so qualified. I am not convinced that she erred in that regard.

[4] As for the educational requirements, it was admitted by counsel for the Crown, Mr. Friday, and in the affidavit of the officer, that the applicant should have allowed 13 units, rather than the 10 given.

[5] Ms. Codina contended that the officer's treatment of the S.V.P. factor (Specific Vocational Preparation), which earned the applicant only 1 unit, and the Experience factor, which earned only 2 units, was flawed.

[6] She argued that informal and on the job training should be taken into account in making this assessment, not only formal training, and suggested that the officers were improperly administering the system.

[7] In my view, there was no error of law or palpable and overriding error of fact made by the officer which would permit me to interfere. Finally, I am not persuaded that there has been any denial of fairness or natural justice in this matter.

[8] The application will be dismissed. I can see no issue worthy of being certified in appeal in this matter.

"A.M. Linden"

J.A.

Toronto, Ontario

July 28, 1998

FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record

COURT NO: IMM-3552-97

STYLE OF CAUSE: RASHID IMRAN

- and -

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

DATE OF HEARING: JULY 28, 1998

PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO

REASONS FOR ORDER BY: LINDEN, J.A.

DATED: JULY 28, 1998

HEARD BY WAY OF TELEPHONE CONFERENCE

APPEARANCES:

Ms. Angie Codina

For the Applicant

Mr. Godwin Friday

For the Respondent

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Codina & Pukitis

Barristers & Solicitors

390 Bay Street

Suite 1708

Toronto, Ontario

M5H 2Y2