Yesterday, an individual called wanting to know if the fact that she was pregnant would guarantee a successful H&C application because of the duty to consider the “best interests of the child.” The father is Canadian.
The National Occupational Classification System
Canada’s immigration system heavily relies on the National Occupational Classification (“NOC”) system, managed by Service Canada. For applicants in the economic class, a deep understanding of the NOC system is crucial. The success of their immigration applications often hinges on proving they have qualifying experience or pre-arranged employment in specific NOC categories. Employers submitting Labour Market Impact Assessment (“LMIAs”) applications to the Ministry of Economic and Social Development Canada (“ESDC“) need to know which NOCs their positions fall under because this will determine the respective prevailing wage and recruitment requirements. Moreover, international graduates should be mindful of the NOC classification of their first job after completing post-secondary education. Experience in certain NOCs is essential for it to count towards immigration eligibility.
Understanding Judicial Review
When a visa application has been refused and an applicant is convinced that the decision is unreasonable then it may be advisable to file an Application for Leave to Commence Judicial Review with the Federal Court of Canada (the “Federal Court” or the “Court”). The Federal Court has the jurisdiction to review the decisions of visa officers. The Court will determine whether an immigration officer committed any reviewable errors that should result in the decision being set aside. Reviewable errors include errors of fact, law, or breaches of procedural fairness. If an applicant succeeds in Federal Court, then the Court will order that the immigration officer’s decision be set aside, and typically that the application be reconsidered by a different officer. Usually, a successful judicial review will ultimately result in a positive decision from the second visa officer. However, this is not always the case. Furthermore, as the Federal Court of Appeal determined in Lee v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) 2004 FCA 143, there is no obligation on the second immigration officer to specifically refer to the order of the Court in the judicial review and provide reasons as to how and why the second decision differs from the … Read More
Bringing an Adopted Child to Canada
It is not uncommon for Canadians to adopt children from abroad. Those that wish to do so should be aware that there are many immigration hurdles to overcome. The purpose of this post is to introduce prospective parents of some of the issues.
Ezokola and the Test For Complicity
In 2013, the Supreme Court of Canada in Ezokola v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) created a new test for determining complicity in Article 1F(a) exclusion cases. Article 1F(a) of the 1951 Refugee Convention provides that: The provisions of this Convention shall not apply to any person with respect to whom there are serious reasons for considering that: (a) He has committed a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity, as defined in the international instruments drawn up to make provision in respect of such crimes; Pursuant to the Supreme Court of Canada decision in Mugesera v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2005 SCC 40, a crime against humanity is committed when each of the following four elements is satisfied: An enumerated proscribed act was committed (this involves showing that the accused committed the criminal act and had the requisite guilty state of mind for the underlying act); The act was committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack; The attack was directed against any civilian population or any identifiable group of persons; and The person who committed the proscribed act knew of the attack and knew or took the risk that his or her act comprised … Read More
Misrepresentation Cases at the Immigration Appeal Division
A permanent resident can lose their permanent resident status and be banned from Canada if they commit misrepresentation. However, they have a right of appeal to the Immigration Appeal Division (the “IAD“). At the IAD, the permanent resident can argue that the determination that they committed misrepresentation was based on a factual error or mistake in law. They can also argue that there are sufficient humanitarian & compassionate (“H&C“) to warrant relief. The Test In Wang v. Canada, the Federal Court of Canada set out the following factors (generally known as the “Wang” or the “modified Chieu” factors) to be the appropriate considerations in determining whether there are sufficient H&C considerations to justify not cancelling someone’s permanent resident status and banning them from Canada for five years: the seriousness of the misrepresentation leading to the removal order and the circumstances surrounding it; the remorsefulness of the permanent residence; the length of time spent in Canada and the degree to which the permanent resident is established in Canada; the permanent resident’s family in Canada and the impact on the family that removal would cause; the best interests of a child directly affected by the decision; the support available to the permanent resident … Read More
The Start-Up Business Class
On April 11, 2018, regulations for the Start-Up Business Class (the “Start-Up Business Class”) came into effect. The regulations slightly modify the program that has been in effect since April 1, 2013. Both applicants as well as designated entities should be aware of the changes.
CBSA National Security Screening
According to its website, the Canada Border Services Agency (“CBSA“) screens all visitors, immigrants and refugee claimants to keep Canada safe and secure. Inadmissible persons such as criminals or persons considered security risks are not allowed to enter or remain in Canada. The following PDF contains a detailed breakdown of how this works and efforts to reduce backlogs. Here is a PDF containing more information.
Arranged Employment
Regulation 82 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, SOR/2002-227 states: 82 (1) In this section, arranged employment means an offer of employment that is made by a single employer other than an embassy, high commission or consulate in Canada or an employer who is referred to in any of subparagraphs 200(3)(h)(i) to (iii), that is for continuous full-time work in Canada having a duration of at least one year after the date on which a permanent resident visa is issued, and that is in an occupation that is listed in Skill Type 0 Management Occupations or Skill Level A or B of the National Occupational Classification matrix. Arranged employment (10 points) (2) Ten points shall be awarded to a skilled worker for arranged employment if they are able to perform and are likely to accept and carry out the employment and (a) the skilled worker is in Canada and holds a work permit that is valid on the date on which their application for a permanent resident visa is made and, on the date on which the visa is issued, holds a valid work permit or is authorized to work in Canada under section 186 and (i) the work permit … Read More
TRPs for Americans
American nationals wishing to visit Canada may be unable to do so if they have a criminal record which renders them inadmissible to Canada. In order to overcoem their inadmissibility, they need to either apply for criminal rehabilitation or a temporary resident permit (a “TRP”). TRPs Section 24 of the IRPA provides that: A foreign national who, in the opinion of an officer, is inadmissible or does not meet the requirements of this Act becomes a temporary resident if an officer is of the opinion that it is justified in the circumstances and issues a temporary resident permit, which may be cancelled at any time. The Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (“IRCC“) TRP guidelines (the “Guidelines”) provide officers with the following guidance on issuing TRPs: Generally, individuals who do not meet the requirements of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), or who are inadmissible under the IRPA, may be refused a permanent resident visa (PRV) or temporary resident visa (TRV) abroad refused an electronic travel authorization (eTA) reported inadmissible under section A44(1) allowed to withdraw their application to enter Canada at a port of entry (POE) refused processing within Canada In some cases, however, an officer may issue a … Read More