Date: 20170117

Docket: IMM-2893-16

Citation: 2017 FC 59

Toronto, Ontario, January 17, 2017

PRESENT:    The Honourable Mr. Justice Shore

JUDGMENT AND REASONS

I.                   Overview

[1]               During his studies in Canada, the Applicant was an honour student at George Brown College. The same academic institution has now accepted his application for a resumption of post-secondary study.

[2]               It cannot be stated that his study plans do not encompass a logical trajectory for a study permit from the evidence before the Visa Officer, nor that it is insufficient. (Reference is made to Egheoma v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, IMM-1005-16, October 20, 2016.)

II.                Decision

[3]               The Applicant applied for a study permit pursuant to subsection 11(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27. The study permit was denied by the Visa Officer due to (1) overall unreasonableness of the Applicant’s plan of studies; (2) strong personal ties to Canada; and, (3) previous immigration history (2010-2014) when he was a student living in Canada with his parents, during which time the family had been refused refugee status.

[4]               During his studies in Canada, the Applicant was an honour student at George Brown College. The same academic institution has now accepted his application for a resumption of post-secondary study.

[5]               The Applicant has provided evidence of the establishment of his parents in Greece; corroboration was submitted as to significant savings for the Applicant’s student stay in Canada.

[6]               The Applicant’s family resides in Greece and his ties therein remain strong. Only former friends are living in Canada with no family ties to his person.

[7]               It cannot be stated that his study plans do not encompass a logical trajectory for a study permit from the evidence before the Visa Officer, nor that it is insufficient.

[8]               It is not understandably clear as to why the Visa Officer denied the study permit. Without more specific clarification, even be it significantly brief, the officer’s decision is not reasonable.

[9]               Therefore, the Application for judicial review is granted. The matter is to be returned to a different Visa Officer for determination anew.

JUDGMENT

THIS COURT’S JUDGMENT is that the application for judicial review be granted; the matter is returned to a different Visa Officer for determination anew. There is no serious question of general importance to be certified.

"Michel M.J. Shore"

FEDERAL COURT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD

APPEARANCES:

SOLICITORS OF RECORD: