Who we are
Steven Meurrens is a Partner at Larlee Rosenberg, a highly regarded law firm in Vancouver, British Columbia that practices exclusively in Canadian immigration law.
Practice Areas
Our firm practices almost exclusively in Canadian immigration matters, including work permit applications, provincial nominations, skilled worker applications, and more.
Immigration Blog
Responding to Procedural Fairness Letters
Where an applicant submits a complete application, but an immigration officer nonetheless has concerns regarding the merits of it, the immigration officer will often provide a fairness letter to the applicant. This requirement has arisen from Federal Court of Canada jurisprudence which provides that the duty of procedural fairness can require that an applicant be given an opportunity to respond to a decision maker’s concerns when those concerns go beyond simply whether the legislation or related requirements are met on the face of the application. When, for example, the applicant may be unaware of the existence or the basis of the concern, procedural fairness may require prior notice of the concern before a decision is made so that the applicant has an opportunity to try to disabuse the officer of the concern. As the Court noted in Kaur v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 809, this is the case for both temporary and permanent residency applications. In Asanova v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 1173, the Court stated: Even so, at a minimum procedural fairness requires that an applicant for a visa have an opportunity to participate meaningfully in the application process. Consequently, the duty of procedural fairness can require ...
Chinook
In addition to automated triaging Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada ("IRCC") has also introduced software so that officers can bulk process applications. The software tool is known as Chinook. According to an affidavit that IRCC filed in Federal Court, Chinook is a standalone tool that streamlines administrative steps. Applicant information is extracted from their applications and presented in a spreadsheet. Visa officers are assigned a workload of applications through Chinook. They are able to see multiple applications at a time on a single spreadsheet. This allows them to review the contents of multiple applications on a single screen, and allows them to complete administrative steps through batch processes. It also allows visa officers to create “risk indicators” and “local word flags” so that officers can identify possible applications in the processing queue of concern or priority. According to the Federal Court affidavit, when visa officers enter Chinook a message pops up which says, amongst other things, “The Chinook User Interface allows you to view multiple applications for review and initial assessment. It does not replace reviewing documents.. and/or reviewing other information… The refusal notes generator is meant to assist with general bona fide refusals. If the notes do not reflect ...
Misrepresentation
Section 40 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act provides that a permanent resident or foreign national is inadmissible to Canada for directly or indirectly misrepresenting or withholding a material fact relating to a relevant matter that induces or could induce an error in the administration of Canada’s immigration laws. The general consequence of misrepresenting is a five-year ban from entering Canada. Canada is very strict on misrepresentation. In Bundhel v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2014 FC 1147, for example, Mr. Bundhel had been charged and convicted with an offence, which had been overturned on appeal. Mr. Bundhel would accordingly not have been criminally inadmissible to Canada. Because of this, he put on his immigration forms that he had never been charged or arrested. When it discovered thathehad been previously charged, what is now Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada wrote to him and provided him with an opportunity to explain why he misrepresented. After the immigration officer reviewed Mr. Bundhel’s explanation that it was an innocent mistake, the officer refused the application, and declared the person inadmissible to Canada for misrepresentation. The Court wrote (citations removed): Mr. Bundhel’s complaint that the Officer should have considered the fact that he owned-up to the ...