A mandamus order is a judicial command to a government body to do, or forbear from, doing a specific act which it is obligated in law to do. The Federal Court’s decision in Vaziri v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2006 FC 1159, is one of the most cited case in the immigration context for setting forth the test for when a mandamus order will be given. There, Justice Snider stated: The equitable remedy of mandamus lies to compel the performance of a public legal duty that a public authority refuses or neglects to carry out when called upon to do so. Mandamus can be used to control procedural delays (Blencoe v. British Columbia (Human Rights Commission) [2000] 2 S.C.R. 307 at para. 149). The test for mandamus is set out in Apotex Inc. v. Canada (Attorney General), [1994] 1 F.C. 742 (C.A.), aff’d [1994] 3 S.C.R. 1100 (and, more recently, discussed in the immigration context in Dragan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2003] 4 F.C. 189 (T.D.), aff’d [2003] F.C.J. No. 813, 2003 FCA 233,). The eight factors are: (i) There must be a public legal duty to act; (ii) The duty must be owed to the Applicants; (iii) … Read More
When Procedural Fairness Requires a Fairness Letter
One of the most complicated topics in immigration law is determining when procedural fairness will require an immigration officer who is assessing an application to seek clarification in the form of a fairness letter or interview. As the Supreme Court of Canada noted in Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) the the concept of procedural fairness is eminently variable and its content is to be decided in the specific context of each case. When a visa officer does not rely on third party extrinsic evidence to make a decision it can often appear unclear when exactly it is necessary for an officer to afford an applicant an interview or a right to respond to the officer’s concerns. However, there will be a right to respond under certain circumstances. Requirement to Provide Complete Applications Visa officers do not have any legal responsibility to advise applicants of incomplete or inadequate applications. In Kaur v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2010 FC 758, for example, the Federal Court dismissed a judicial review application of a visa officer’s refusal of an applicant under the Federal Skilled Worker Program. A visa officer determined that the application was deficient as it failed to include required information regarding … Read More
Understanding the Citizenship Revocation Process
Between 1977 and 2010 only 63 people had their citizenship revoked. In July, 2011, Jason Kenney, then the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (“Minister Kenney“), announced that as many as 1,800 Canadians could be stripped of their citizenship because they obtained their citizenship fraudulently. The 1,800 individuals were identified following a three-year investigation by the RCMP, other police forces and Citizenship and Immigration Canada. On September 9, 2012, Minister Kenney announced that the number of people who would likely have their citizenship revoked had risen to 3,100, with an additional 11,000 people under investigation. An Access to Information Act request revealed that most of the Canadian citizens who were the subject of investigations were originally from the following countries. By the end of 2012, the process of revoking these peoples’ citizenship had already begun. Ultimately, after Federal Court litigation and a change in government, citizenship revocations continue at a rate much smaller than it seemed would occur, but more than before. In 2021, 7 people had their citizenship revoked. In 2022, it was 25. Section 10 of the Citizenship Act The authority of the Government of Canada to strip people of their citizenship is legally provided for by s. 10 of the … Read More
Work Experience Under the FSWP and the CEC
In both the Federal Skilled Worker Program, the Canadian Experience Class, and indeed most economic immigration programs, the government of Canada relies on Service Canada’s National Occupational Classification (“NOC“) system to determine eligibility. In the Canadian Experience Class, for example, subsections 87.1(2)(b) and (c) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (the “IRPR“) set out the job duties that applicants to the Canadian Experience Class must perform in order to meet the requirements of having experience in an eligible NOC. Subsection 87.1(2)(b) provides that an applicant must have performed the “actions described in the lead statement for the occupation as set out [in the NOC]”, while subsection 87.1(2)(c) provides that an applicant also must have performed a “substantial number of the main duties of the occupation as set out in the NOC, including all of the essential duties.” In the Federal Skilled Worker Program, meanwhile, s. 75(2)(a)-(c) of the IRPR states: A foreign national is a skilled worker if (a) within the 10 years before the date on which their application for a permanent resident visa is made, they have accumulated, over a continuous period, at least one year of full-time work experience, or the equivalent in part-time work, in the occupation … Read More
Staying Removal at Federal Court
The Federal Court of Canada can provide interlocutory stays, including staying removal. There is a three-stage test to be applied when considering an application for an interlocutory injunction. A court must determine that there is a serious issue or question to be tried, that the applicant would suffer irreparable harm if the injunction were to be refused, and that the balance of convenience (assessed by examining which of the parties will suffer the greater harm from granting or refusing the injunction) rests with the applicant. As well, it is important to note that a stay of removal is an equitable remedy that is typically only available to an individual who has not committed an inequity. Overall Guidance In Slepcsik v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FCA 137, the Federal Court of Appeal wrote: [1] For the vast and overwhelming majority of those who are returned to their country of citizenship, removal from Canada is immensely stressful, anxiety-provoking, deeply sad, and heartbreaking. One loses their job or abandons their studies, and all health and social benefits cease. It involves enforced separation from loved ones and friends, along with being torn from the stability and comfort one may have known while in Canada. To think otherwise would … Read More
Ineligibility to Make a Refugee Claim
Section 101(d) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act states: 101. (1) A claim is ineligible to be referred to the Refugee Protection Division if (a) refugee protection has been conferred on the claimant under this Act; (b) a claim for refugee protection by the claimant has been rejected by the Board; (b.1) the claimant entered Canada after June 24, 2020 and made the claim more than one year after the day of their entry; (b.2) the claimant entered Canada at a location along the Canada–United States land border — including the waters along or across that border — that is not a port of entry and made the claim after the end of the time limit referred to in subsection 159.4(1.1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations; (c) a prior claim by the claimant was determined to be ineligible to be referred to the Refugee Protection Division, or to have been withdrawn or abandoned; (c.1) the claimant has, before making a claim for refugee protection in Canada, made a claim for refugee protection to a country other than Canada, and the fact of its having been made has been confirmed in accordance with an agreement or arrangement entered into by … Read More
Language Requirements and Work Permits
Regulation 200(3)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, SOR/2002-227 provides that an officer shall not issue a work permit to a foreign national if there are reasonable grounds to believe that the foreign national is unable to perform the work sought. An issue that is becomming increasingly common is whether someone has sufficient language ability to perform the work sought. IELTS For the most part, the Federal Court has been very deferential to visa officers when assessing whether they have the language requirements to perform the work sought. In Sen v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2022 FC 777, for example, Madam Justice Strickland determined that it was reasonable for a visa officer to determine that someone with a 3.5 IELTS reading score could not perform the duties of a Cook in Canada because they might be unable to follow recipes, read notes from serving staff, and read food safety instructions. In Singh v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2023 FC 170 , Madam Justice McDonald ruled that it was reasonable for a visa officer to determine that an individual with IELTS 5.0 in reading would be unable to safely read road signs, understand safety procedures and regulations, record cargo information and administer bills. … Read More
Canada’s Interpretation of Article 1F(b) of the 1951 Refugee Convention
Article 1F(b) of the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, Can. T.S. 1969 No. 6 (the “1951 Refugee Convention“) states that the provisions of this 1951 Refugee Convention shall not apply to any person with respect to whom there are serious reasons for considering that they have committed a serious non-political crime outside the country of refuge prior to his admission to that country as a refugee. Section 98 of Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (“IRPA” or the “Act“) incorporates Article 1F(b) of the 1951 Refugee Convention into Canadian immigration law. What is the Purpose of Article 1F(b)? Does Is it Restricted to Fugitives? If a Person is Rehabilitated Can They Still be Excluded from Refugee Protection? In Febles v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration Canada), 2014 SCC 68 (“Febles“), the Supreme Court of Canada (the “Supreme Court“) addressed the issue of whether the application of Article 1F(b) of the 1951 Refugee Convention is simply a matter of looking at the seriousness of a crime when it was committed, or whether it requires consideration of other matters, including, for example, whether a refugee claimant is a fugitive and/or whether an individual is rehabilitated. The Supreme Court found that the purpose of Article 1F(b) … Read More
Work Permits for Vulnerable Workers
Section 207.1 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (the “IRPR”) states that (modified for ease of reading): 207.1 (1) A work permit may be issued under section 200 to a foreign national in Canada if there are reasonable grounds to believe that the foreign national is experiencing or is at risk of experiencing abuse in the context of their employment in Canada and if they (a) hold a work permit; or (b) previously held a work permit, have applied for a renewal of that permit and are authorized to work in Canada under implied status. Family member of vulnerable worker (2) A work permit may be issued to a foreign national in Canada who is a family member of a person described in paragraph (1)(a) or (b). In other words, temporary foreign workers in Canada who are experiencing, or have experienced abuse, can apply for open work permits. People who have engaged in unauthorized work or have not complied with employment conditions are not excluded from the program. The objectives of IRPR r. 207.1 are to: provide migrant workers who are experiencing abuse, or who are at risk of abuse, with a distinct means to leave their employer; mitigate the … Read More
Restoration of Status
If a visitor, worker, or student loses their legal status in Canada, they may be eligible to apply for status restoration. This process, known as a restoration application, allows individuals to regain their temporary resident status under specific conditions. According to section 182 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (“IRPR”), applicants must meet certain eligibility criteria to restore their status in Canada.: 182. On application made by a visitor, worker or student within 90 days after losing temporary resident status as a result of failing to comply with a condition imposed under paragraph 185(a), any of subparagraphs 185(b)(i) to (iii) or paragraph 185(c), an officer shall restore that status if, following an examination, it is established that the visitor, worker or student meets the initial requirements for their stay, has not failed to comply with any other conditions imposed and is not the subject of a declaration made under subsection 22.1(1) of the Act. According to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (“IRCC“) Guidelines, if an individual applies to extend their temporary resident status and IRCC refuses the application after their status has expired, the Case Processing Centre – Edmonton will notify them that they can submit a restoration of … Read More