Date: 20020823
Docket: IMM-6475-00
Neutral citation: 2002 FCT 910
BETWEEN:
STANISLAV BORZENKO
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
ROTHSTEIN, J.A. (ex officio)
[1] This is a judicial review of a decision of a visa officer which denied the applicant's application for a permanent resident visa. The applicant was awarded 67 units of assessment, three less than the number required to be eligible for a visa. The applicant says that he should have been awarded 15 units for the education factor rather than 10, thereby giving him a total of 72 units.
[2] On April 21, 1979 the applicant graduated from the DI Kurskiy Law Institute in Saratov, USSR. He received a diploma which certified that he graduated from the full course specializing in jurisprudence. Pursuant to the resolution of the State Examination Commission, he was granted the qualification of lawyer.
[3] The applicant's course in law did not involve at least one year of full time classroom's study, so the visa officer did not consider paragraph 1(c) of Schedule I to be applicable in respect of his diploma. Nor did the visa officer consider that the applicant's diploma was a university degree under paragraph 1(d) of Schedule I. Accordingly, she awarded the applicant only 10 units of assessment for the education factor.
[4] The applicant says his level of education is that of a bachelor's degree in law. In his affidavit he says that the documentation submitted with his application, as well as information provided at his interview, substantiated that assertion.
[5] There is no documentation in the record that substantiates what the applicant alleges. Rather, his argument is based on the fact that he was granted the qualification of lawyer and that an inference should be drawn that he received an education equivalent to a bachelor's degree in law.
[6] There was no documentary evidence before the visa officer indicating whether the DI Kurskiy Law Institute in Saratov is a university. Nor is there documentary evidence that would indicate that the diploma the applicant received was equivalent to a university degree. There is no documentary evidence as to whether a university degree was required in order to be qualified as a lawyer in the USSR at the relevant time.
[7] It appears that the focus of the applicant's application was in respect of his intended occupation which was to be an industrial electrician or an electrical powerline and cable worker. Therefore, it seems neither the applicant nor the visa officer dwelled on the applicant's legal education.
[8] I cannot say that the visa officer took into account irrelevant considerations or failed to take into account relevant considerations. Nor can I say that the visa officer ignored evidence.
[9] The applicant says that there was an obligation on the visa officer to pursue the matter further if she thought there was ambiguity. However, I do not think there was ambiguity on the material before her.
[10] It is true that in Canada, being a lawyer implies a university degree. That will not necessarily be the case in other countries. I do not think there was an obligation on the visa officer to take further steps to clarify the level of the applicant's education merely because he was qualified as a lawyer in the USSR. He, himself, referred to having a diploma and not a university degree. Therefore, prima facie, he did not qualify for 15 units.
[11] This was not a summary dismissal by the visa officer. An interview was conducted at which the applicant had the opportunity to provide information that would support the assertion that he had the equivalent of a first level university degree, notwithstanding the reference in his material to only having a diploma. He did not do so.
[12] I note that the applicant did submit with his application a document from the International Qualifications Assessments Service in Edmonton, Alberta which provided information about the applicant's primary and secondary schooling and his vocational training relating to electrical installations. There is no reference to his legal training or the diploma he received from the Kurskiy Institute.
[13] In the circumstances, I cannot say that the visa officer erred in awarding the applicant only 10 units for education. I would dismiss the judicial review.
"Marshall Rothstein"
Judge
Ottawa, Ontario
August 26, 2002
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
DOCKET: IMM-6475-00
STYLE OF CAUSE: STANISLAV BORZENKO
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND
IMMIGRATION
Respondent
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
DATE OF HEARING: FRIDAY, AUG 23, 2002
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER BY: ROTHSTEIN J.A.
DATED: MONDAY, AUG 26, 2002
APPEARANCES BY: Mr. Benjamin A. Kranc
For the Applicant
Ms. Neeta Logsetty
For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Max Chaudhary
Kranc & Associates
For the Applicant
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date: 20020826
Docket: IMM-6475-00
BETWEEN:
STANSILAV BORZENKO
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER
Email this Content