The Canadian Bill of Rights, S.C. 1960, c. 44 (the “Bill of Rights“) is a Canadian federal statute that was enacted in August 1960. It is quasi-constitutional in nature. As it is an Act of Parliament it applies only to federal law. It also predates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which has largely superseded the Bill of Rights in importance. However, not all of the provisions of the Bill of Rights were reproduced in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Section 2(e) of the Bill of Rights provides: 2. Every law of Canada shall, unless it is expressly declared by an Act of the Parliament of Canada that it shall operate notwithstanding the Canadian Bill of Rights, be so construed and applied as not to abrogate, abridge or infringe or to authorize the abrogation, abridgment or infringement of any of the rights or freedoms herein recognized and declared, and in particular, no law of Canada shall be construed or applied so as to […] (e) deprive a person of the right to a fair hearing in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice for the determination of his rights and obligations. In Canadian National Railway Company, the Federal Court established that four basic conditions must be met … Read More
Retrospective Legislation
In a recent Borderlines episode, Garth Barriere, Eric Purtzki, Peter Edelmann and I discussed the constitutionality of laws that are retroactive or retrospective. This episode can be found here: A link to this episode’s synopsis can be found here. The following post provides a more detailed written summary of retroactive and retrospective legislation in the immigration context.
Who Can Help You with Immigration Matters
The following article appeared in the November issue of Canadian immigrant magazine: Who Can Help You with Immigration Matters Understanding the New Regulations I frequently receive e-mails from individuals asking if it is true that it is either illegal or impossible to immigrate toCanadawithout hiring a lawyer or a paid consultant. Some people appear to be under the mistaken impression that the Government of Canada recently enacted regulations to this affect. I am not sure what the source of this misinformation is, but hopefully by the end of this article I will have dispelled these myths. Bill C-35 The first misconception that needs to be clarified is the substance of Bill C-35, which came into force on June 31, 2011. Bill C-35 changed many rules pertaining to immigration representatives, however, not one of them made it mandatory to hire a paid representative. Amongst other things, Bill C-35 makes it an offence for anyone other an authorized representative to conduct business, for a fee or other benefit, at any stage of an immigration application or proceeding. Authorized representatives include lawyers, paralegals in certain provinces, and members of the Immigration Consultants of Canada Regulatory Council (“ICCRC”). The penalty for providing paid … Read More
Urgent Processing of PR Cards
On October 20, 2016, IRCC posted Operational Bulletin 627. It restricts what qualifies for “urgent processing” of PR Cards to: travel due to an applicant’s own serious illness or the serious illness or death of a family member; or to obtain employment or to travel due to employment requirements or opportunity. In Li v. Canada (Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship),the Federal Court stated that mandamus cannto be used to compel IRCC to mail a PR Card rather than require that it be picked up in person.
H&C Third Country
Several Federal Court of Canada decisions affirm that a visa officer’s assessment of humanitarian & compassionate considerations will be unreasonable if the officer assesses hardship on the basis that a foreign national will reside in a country other than their country of citizenship. In Hermann v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2014 FC 266, Justice Zinn stated: I have very serious doubt that in making an H&C assessment an officer can assess hardship on the premise that the applicant relocate to a country other than his country of nationality, regardless of any mobility agreements between countries. If an applicant is in Canada without authorization and is to be removed, Canada cannot remove him to a country other than his country of nationality. Why then should Canada consider any other country when examining hardship to the applicant in a H&C application? In Abdullah v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 FC 954, Justice McAffie stated: This Court has held that assessing an H&C application with reference to a country where the applicant has no legal status is an error that renders a decision unreasonable. In Joe (Litigation guardian of) v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2009 FC 116 [Joe], the minor applicant was a … Read More
Environmental Overview – Chandigarh
Earlier this year I published a partial reproduction of the Environmental Overview of the immigration functions at the Canadian Consulate in Chandigargh current to 2012. The post was quite popular, and the following is a summary of the most recent Environmental Overview of the immigration functions at the Canadian Consulate in Chandigarh (the “Environmental Overview”). The Environmental Overview was prepared as part of the Citizenship and Immigration Canada 2014-2015 planning exercise, and is current as of January 2014. Areas in blockquote are direct passages from the Environmental Overview. Environment The Canadian Consulate in Chandigarh (“CIC Chandigarh“) provides temporary residence processing in northwest India. Chandigarh is a non-immigrant processing office. However in 2013 we processed some family class files in order to assist Delhi with their targets and to provide a learning experience for officers in Chandigarh. Over 400 family class applications were interviewed and processed to conclusion in 2013. SuperVisas continue to account for 15% of our total visitor intake. Systemic fraud necessitates a careful review of applications in all lines of business. Interestingly, CIC Chandigarh has been active in meeting with Punjab government officials to provide input on the new Punjab Prevention of Human Smuggling Act, a law which provides a registration system … Read More
Employment Reference Letters and Immigration
Most Canadian economic immigration programs require that applicants have qualifying work experience. In order to demonstrate that past and current positions qualify, applicants are required to provide references letters from their employers. Such reference letters must state the position title, duration, duties and wage. Prospective immigrants who are obtaining reference letters should understand how officers determine whether specific employment experience meets program eligibility requirements, why reference letters are needed and how immigration officers will assess them. Relying on the NOC system In determining whether work experience is qualifying, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) relies on the Government of Canada’s national occupational classification (or NOC) system. In the federal skilled worker class, for example, applicants need to have within the 10 years before they apply at least one year of full-time work experience, or the equivalent of part-time work, in their primary occupation that is listed on the NOC website as being skilled. In the Canadian experience class, meanwhile, applicants need to show that they have acquired in Canada, within the three years before the date on which they apply for permanent residence, at least one year of full-time work experience in one or more occupations that are listed on … Read More
Canadian Immigration Embassy Interview Strategies and Tips
When visa officers have concerns regarding a completed application, they often convoke interviews. The interview provides the applicants to address these concerns. In this post I hope to convey to applicants the basic procedural fairness rules that they can expect.
What Will Cause A Refused NEXUS Application
As I have previously written about in this blog, there are numerous benefits to being a member in the NEXUS program. Membership in NEXUS enables people to save time through the use of automatic self-serve kiosks at airports, designated lanes at the land border, and expedited security procedures at airports. Indeed, on November 13, the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority started a pilot project featuring a new, expedited screening line for NEXUS members at the security screening checkpoint for flights to the U.S. in Terminal 1 at Toronto Pearson International Airport. NEXUS members who participate in this pilot are permitted to keep shoes, belts and light jackets on and leave laptops, large electronics, and compliant liquids, aerosols and gels in carry-on bags. For many people, one of the frustrating things about the NEXUS program is that the Canada Border Services Agency (“CBSA“) website is very vague as to what may cause Canada to refuse someone’s NEXUS application. It states: Canada’s Presentation of Persons (2003) Regulations, SOR/2003-323 (the “PoP Regulations“) are also not clear as to what may disqualify someone from being able to enrol in NEXUS. The Regulations state: 6. The Minister may issue an authorization to a person to present themself in an alternative manner described in paragraph … Read More
Appealing Loss of NEXUS Cards and NEXUS Application Rejections
Anyone who travels frequently understands the benefits of NEXUS membership. At airports, NEXUS members avoid long line-ups and save time using automated self-serve kiosks at eight designated Canadian international airports. The wait-times are much less than they are for non-NEXUS passengers. As well, NEXUS members are expedited through Canadian Air Transport Security Authority airport security screening lanes. This is the case even on domestic flights. Those crossing the US-Canada border by land enjoy a quick and simplified entry process using dedicated lanes. Wait-times are generally a fraction of what they are for non-NEXUS members. It is not uncommon for the NEXUS lane(s) to be empty while the non-NEXUS lanes have wait-times exceeding one hour. If you’ve never heard of NEXUS, you should read more about it on the CBSA website here. Considering all the benefits which membership in NEXUS provides, it is understandable why people whose NEXUS membership applications are rejected often seek recourse, as do people who lose their NEXUS. Legislation Regulation 6.1 of the Presentation of Persons (2003) Regulations, SOR/2003-323 provides that: NEXUS program (air, land and marine) 6.1 The Minister may issue an authorization that is recognized in both Canada and the United States to a person, other than … Read More