The following is the 2018 Migration Office Overview for Berlin.
C-14 Work Permits
On February 17, 2016, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (“IRCC”) introduced a Labour Market Impact Assessment (“LMIA”) exemption for foreign nationals in the television and film industry whose position or occupation is essential to a TV or film production. On September 13, 2021 IRCC narrowed the LMIA exemption. The exemption previously read: (exemption code C14) – Canada.ca”] The current requirements are that the work that a foreign national is performing must be: essential to a live-action TV or film project in the production stage (filming): Essential positions are those where the physical presence of foreign workers on location in Canada is required to generate the expected benefit; be high wage: Evidence of high-wage work is meant to establish that Canada will reap a significant economic benefit (for example, tax revenue) from hiring a foreign national and to protect the Canadian labour market from wage suppression; unionized: Proof of unionized work demonstrates that the employment of the foreign national is critical to the production occurring in Canada while protecting the direct employment of Canadians. Occupations that may meet these criteria include, but are not limited to, actors and actresses, directors, stunt persons, lighting specialists and choreographers. Consideration under this exemption is … Read More
Paying to Wait to Immigrate
In the immigration world, the waiting game is a fact of life.
Borderlines Podcast Episode #46 – An Interview with Sergio Marchi, Canada’s Immigration Minister from 1993-1995
Sergio Marchi was Canada’s Minister of Citizenship and Immigration from 1993-1995. 3:00 – Does someone keep the Minister title their whole life? 4:50 – What was the political consensus regarding Canadian immigration at the end of the 1980s? How did the Reform Party impact things? 8:00 – The mix of immigrants between economic, family and humanitarian immigrants. 11:15 – What dictates whether IRCC meets its level targets? 14:30 – The Brian Mulroney government was considering moving immigration under Public Safety. Under Sergio Marchi it instead became it’s on Ministry. What prompted this? 17:30 – Canadian attitudes to refugee resettlements and misconceptions. 20:45 – Sources of resistance to refugee resettlement. Resettled refugees vs asylum seekers. 23:00 – Changes that Minister Marchi made to the refugee determination process. 25:00 – What was Minister Marchi’s approach to intervening on specific cases? When would Minister Marchi help Members of Parliament on constituent files? Did it matter which political party the MP was from? 32:00 – The impact of a police officer who was shot by an illegal immigrant on deportation policy. 36:00 – Whether the Canada Border Services Agency should be under the immigration umbrella. 37:30 – What Minister Marchi considers to be his … Read More
Borderlines Podcast Episode 45 – Spousal Sponsorship Delays and Refusals, with Chantal Dube and Syed Farhan Ali
Syed Farhan Ali shares his Canadian immigration story. During the time that his spousal sponsorship application was in process he was denied temporary entry to Canada, missed the birth of his first child and missed her first steps. He recently arrived in Canada after a three year application process. Chantal Dube is a Spokesperson for Spousal Sponsorship Advocates, a group with more than 5,000 members in Canada that argues for reforms to the family reunification process. 3:15 Said tells the story of his spousal sponsorship application. His application took 34 months to process. During the processing of his application Canada denied his visitor visa applications. He missed the birth of his children and their first steps, although he was able to reunite with his wife during brief trips to the United States, which did grant him a visitor visa. 21:00 We discuss the refusal of temporary resident visas for people with spousal sponsorship applications in process, people with frequent travel histories, people with American multiple entry visas, and judicial reviews. 25:00 How long a judicial review takes. 29:50 Assessing genuineness in a spousal sponsorship application, and the distinction between “low risk and high risk” in the checklists. 33:00 The … Read More
Delays in Claiming Asylum
The Federal Court decision in Calderon Garcia v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2012 FC 412 sets out the legal principles regarding a delay in claiming asylum. It states: The Applicants assert that the Board erred in rejecting their claim based solely on the delay in claiming and a lack of supporting documentation. However, this position is not supported by the Board’s decision or related jurisprudence. Delay in making a refugee claim “is not a decisive factor in itself” but it is a “relevant element which the tribunal may take into account in assessing both the statements and the actions and deeds of a claimant” (Huerta v Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration) (1993), 157 NR 225, [1993] FCJ no 271 (CA)). It is reasonable to expect that the Applicants would make a claim at the first possible opportunity (see Jeune v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2009 FC 835, [2009] FCJ no 965 at para 15). Recent jurisprudence also suggests that while the delay itself is not determinative, it “may, in the right circumstances, constitute sufficient grounds upon which to dismiss a claim” (Duarte v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2003 FC 988, [2003] FCJ no 1259 at … Read More
Applying for a Permit When Country Conditions Are Not Good
It is generally regarded as difficult for people who are from countries with bad home country conditions to apply for permits. Hamad v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2012 FC 336 is an example of how to put together an application that can overcome these issues. Background When he applied, Mr. Hamad lived in Benghazi, Libya, with Ms. Mahmoud and their four children who were all under the age of ten. They were all Libyan citizens. In 2011, Mr. Hamad applied to study in Canada at George Brown College in a business administration-accounting program. Mr. Hamad had two brothers living in Libya. His third brother was a Canadian citizen who lived in Toronto and who testified that he was committed to supporting and financially assisting his brother’s family during their stay in Canada. Mr. Hamad had previously traveled to Egypt, and in his application stated that he had visited his brother in Canada in 1991, on a visitor’s visa valid from January 24, 1991 to July 23, 1991, and that he left Canada before the expiry date. The family had no debts, had a home, an orchard and a well in Libya. Mr. Hamad also owned a transport truck and an … Read More
A34 – Inadmissibility for Security Reasons
Section 34 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act provides that a permanent resident or foreign national is inadmissible to Canada for security reasons. It states: Security 34. (1) A permanent resident or a foreign national is inadmissible on security grounds for (a) engaging in an act of espionage that is against Canada or that is contrary to Canada’s interests; (b) engaging in or instigating the subversion by force of any government; (b.1) engaging in an act of subversion against a democratic government, institution or process as they are understood in Canada; (c) engaging in terrorism; (d) being a danger to the security of Canada; (e) engaging in acts of violence that would or might endanger the lives or safety of persons in Canada; or (f) being a member of an organization that there are reasonable grounds to believe engages, has engaged or will engage in acts referred to in paragraph (a), (b), (b.1) or (c). (2) [Repealed, 2013, c. 16, s. 13] Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada has produced a useful internal document summarizing the jurisprudence (up to about 2010) on the interpretation of this section, and I have reproduced it below. More recent jurisprudence can be found throughout my blog, but … Read More
Extensions of Time and Judicial Review
Section 72(2)(b) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act provides that a judicial review shall be filed within 15 days of a matter arising in Canada and 60 days on a matter arising outside of Canada. Rule 6(2) of the Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules, S.O.R./93‑22 provides that a request for an extension of time shall be determined at the same time, and on the same materials, as the application for leave. In Singh v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2021 FC 93, Justice Bell affirmed that extension request determinations should not be left to the judicial review but rather addressed at leave. He further noted: Having expressed my opinion regarding the approach to be employed, I will, nonetheless, decide the question of the extension of time. Time limits have a purpose. One of their clear purposes is to ensure evidence does not go stale. Another is undoubtedly, to ensure defendants or respondents can know with some degree of certainty the extent of potential claims outstanding against them. Given these and other considerations, the Courts have developed an objective and balanced approach to when motions for extensions of time will be granted. Generally, the moving party must demonstrate: a) a continuing intention … Read More
Refusal to Process a Labour Market Impact Assessment
A Labour Market Impact Assessment (a “LMIA“) is an assessment by the Department of Employment and Social Development Canada (“ESDC“) that the hiring of a foreign worker will have a positive, neutral or negative impact on Canada’s labour market. An LMIA is often a requirement to hire a foreign worker. There are certain situations in which ESDC will refuse to issue a LMIA. This effectively precludes employers from utilizing the Temporary Foreign Worker Program (the “TFWP“). The Sex Industry Regulations 183(b.1) and 196.1 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations (the “IRPR”) provides that temporary residents are prohibited from entering into an employment agreement, or extending the term of an employment agreement, with an employer who, on a regular basis, offers striptease, erotic dance, escort services or erotic massages. Regulation 200(3)(g.1) of the IRPR further provides that work permits cannot be issued to workers who intend to work for employers who, on a regular basis, offers striptease, erotic dance, escort services or erotic massages. Because of this, ESDC will not issue LMIAs to employers who regularly offer services in the sex industry (striptease, erotic dance, escort services or erotic massage). Ineligilibity List Employers who hire temporary workers may be inspected to … Read More