Date: 20071115
Docket: IMM-421-07
Citation: 2007 FC 1173
BETWEEN:
KELTOUN BAHMED
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND
IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Pinard
J.
[1]
This
is an application for judicial review of the decision of a visa officer at the
Canadian Embassy in Rabat, Morocco, who, on November 20, 2006
refused to grant the applicant a work visa as a live-in caregiver for her
sister-in-law in Ingleside, Ontario. This decision followed a first
decision made on November 6, 2006 by another visa officer who also denied the
same requested work visa.
[2]
On
November 6, 2006, the visa officer dealing with the applicant’s case noted that
the applicant was an embroiderer by occupation and did not have any brothers or
sisters at home to take care of. Furthermore, the applicant had not brought her
secondary education diploma with her. In light of her lack of experience and
diploma, the visa officer noted that she had no choice but to reject the
application.
[3]
The
applicant returned to the visa office on November 20, 2006, this time bringing
her “Certificat de scolarité” which stated that she had completed her “neuvième
année de l’enseignement fondamental,” and a letter certifying that she worked
as an ‘éducatrice’ from September 1, 2002 to June 30, 2004. The second visa
officer determined that the applicant’s education did not meet the
requirements, as the applicant had not completed secondary school. Furthermore,
the applicant’s work experience was not sufficient because she had only acquired
seven months of experience in the three years immediately preceding her
application. Therefore, the visa officer again rejected the application.
[4]
Paragraph
112(c) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations,
SOR/2002-227 (the Regulations) provides that, before a live-in caregiver work
visa can be issued, an applicant must have completed six months of full-time
training or one year of full-time paid employment in a field or occupation
related to the employment for which the work permit is sought. The work
experience must be within the three years immediately preceding the date of the
work permit application. Furthermore, an applicant must also have successfully
completed a course of study that is equivalent to the successful completion of
secondary school in Canada. If an applicant does not meet these
requirements, a work permit shall not be issued.
[5]
According
to the applicant, the decision that her education was insufficient was not
well-founded. I do not agree. Upon reviewing the relevant evidence, I find that
the visa
officer’s decision regarding the applicant’s education was reasonable. The
applicant provided a diploma stating she had completed the ninth level of
school in Morocco. It was reasonable,
considering the visa officer’s expertise, for her to determine that this is not
equivalent to successful completion of secondary school in Canada as required by paragraph
112(b) of the Regulations. There is no evidence that completion of a
typing examination was sufficient to bring her academic standing to the
required level (Dowlat v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, 2005
FC 523).
[6]
Furthermore,
I am of the view that the applicant’s claim that the visa officer went on a
‘fishing expedition’ to find reasons to deny the work permit is unsubstantiated.
Contrary to the applicant’s submission that the applicant’s education was not
in dispute at the time of the first decision, the first visa officer indicated
in her reasons that there was no evidence that the applicant met the
educational requirements, and rejected the application for failure to meet both
the education and work experience requirements.
[7]
The
applicant did not put the visa officer’s decision with regard to her lack of
work experience into question in her submissions. This means that, even if the
visa officer’s decision regarding the applicant’s educational qualifications
was unreasonable, another visa officer would reach the same result since the
applicant does not have the required work experience.
[8]
Indeed,
I also find that the visa officer’s decision with regard to the applicant’s
work experience was reasonable. Subparagraph 112(c)(ii) of the Regulations
requires at least one year of related work experience in the three years
immediately preceding the application for a work visa as a live-in caregiver.
The evidence provided by the applicant only demonstrated that she had seven
months of work experience in the preceding three years.
[9]
The
applicant further submits that the visa officer’s reasons are inadequate, and
cites case-law which establishes that a decision-maker’s reasons must be clear
when there is a question of credibility. However, credibility does not seem to
be in question in this decision. The visa officer did not dispute that the
applicant had completed the education and work experience that she claimed.
Rather, the visa officer’s decision relates to whether this experience is
sufficient to meet the requirements of the Regulations.
[10]
I
find that the visa officer’s reasons, while brief, are sufficiently clear and
intelligible for the applicant and the Court to determine why the application
for a work permit was rejected. There is nothing vague or contradictory about
them. I do not see a basis for reviewing the visa officer’s decision on this
ground.
[11]
For
all the above reasons, the application for judicial review is dismissed.
“Yvon
Pinard”
Ottawa,
Ontario
November
15, 2007
FEDERAL COURT
NAME OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-421-07
STYLE OF CAUSE: KELTOUN BAHMED v. THE MINISTER OF
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
PLACE OF
HEARING: Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF
HEARING: October
9, 2007
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT: Pinard J.
DATED: November 15, 2007
APPEARANCES:
Idorenyin E.
Amana FOR THE APPLICANT
Sylviane Roy
FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS
OF RECORD:
Idorenyin E.
Amana FOR THE APPLICANT
Barrister &
Solicitor
Ottawa, Ontario
John H. Sims,
Q.C. FOR THE RESPONDENT
Deputy Attorney
General of Canada
Email this Content