steven.meurrens@larlee.com +1 (866) 282-8399
Steven Meurrens
  • Home
  • About
  • Practice Areas
  • Blog
    • Citizenship Applications and Revocations
    • Immigration Consultants
    • Immigration Trends
    • Inadmissibility
    • Judicial Reviews
    • Labour Market Impact Assessments
    • Maintaining Permanent Residency
    • Business and Entrepreneur Immigrantion
    • Humanitarian and Compassionate
    • Family Class (Spousal Sponsorships, Parents & Grandparents)
    • Provincial Nominee Programs
    • Study Permits
    • Refugees
    • Temporary Resident Visas
    • Work Permits
  • Podcasts
    • Borderlines Podcast
    • Law Cans
  • Downloads
  • Client Portal
  • Contact

Category: Inadmissibility

When You’ve Worked for a Government that Violated Human Rights

22nd Dec 2010 Comments Off on When You’ve Worked for a Government that Violated Human Rights in Inadmissibility

Are you an individual who has served in the government, the public service, the military, or the judiciary of a government that might have engaged in human rights or international rights obligations? Are you considering traveling to, working in, or immigrating to Canada? If you answer yes to either of these questions, you will definitely want to read on to determine whether your application could be in jeopardy.

Read more ›

Income Tax Statements and Inadmissibility

20th Dec 2010 Comments Off on Income Tax Statements and Inadmissibility in Inadmissibility, Work Permits

On December 8, 2010, the Federal Court released its decision in Masych v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2010 FC 1253 (“Masych“)  The case involved an individual whose temporary work permit application was denied because she did not produce income tax statements from 2002-2006 after an immigration officer (the “Officer”) requested that she do so.  The reason that the Officer wanted copies of her tax statements was not to confirm her employment history for determining whether or not she was qualified for the job that she was applying for, but rather to determine whether or not she was inadmissible for having ever committed tax evasion.

The applicant had never been convicted of a criminal offense.  No evidence was ever presented that she had been charged with a criminal offense.  Finally, it is important to note that the applicant lived in the United Kingdom from 2002-2006, a country with a legal system similar to Canada’s.

The applicant did not produce the income tax statements as requested, and her application was rejected on the grounds that the Officer was unable to determine whether or not she was inadmissible to Canada for having committed an offense abroad that would constitute an indictable offense in Canada (tax evasion). The Federal Court upheld the Officer’s decision.  The Court noted that the Officer had a duty to be satisfied that the applicant was not inadmissible, and that tax evasion could result in an applicant being inadmissible.

A reading of the case suggests that the only argument that the applicant’s counsel made was that the applicant had provided a statement stating that she only worked part time, confirmed by the employer, and that this should have satisfied the visa officer.  The Federal Court quickly punted this decision aside noting that such a response did nothing to alleviate the officer’s concern. 

 » Read more about: Income Tax Statements and Inadmissibility  »

Read more ›

Immigration Consequences of a Conviction and Sentence in Canada

2nd Dec 2010 Comments Off on Immigration Consequences of a Conviction and Sentence in Canada in Inadmissibility

A person who has been found to be inadmissible to Canada on the grounds of serious criminality may not appeal to the Immigration Appeal Division.

Read more ›

Membership in a Group that Once Committed Terror

5th Nov 2010 Comments Off on Membership in a Group that Once Committed Terror in Inadmissibility

The Federal Court of Appeal has answered a question regarding inadmissibility under s. 34 of IRPA.

Read more ›

Authorizations to Return to Canada

3rd Nov 2010 Comments Off on Authorizations to Return to Canada in Inadmissibility

Last updated on December 5th, 2019

Section 52(1) of Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Act provides that a person who has been removed from Canada cannot return to Canada unless the person first receives specific authorization from immigration authorities.  This authorization is known as “authorization to return to Canada” (an “ARC“).  Whether an ARC is needed will depend on what type of removal order the person received.

Types of Removal Orders

Removal orders can be issued by officers at ports of entry, inland enforcement officers and the Immigration and Refugee Board’s (the “IRB”) Immigration Division.

There are three types of removal orders in Canada.  These are the “Departure Order,” the “Exclusion Order,” and the “Deportation Order”.

A Departure Order requires that a person leave Canada within 30 days after the order becomes enforceable.  Failure to do so causes the Departure Order to become a Deportation Order.  Examples of where a Departure Order would occur is a permanent resident who fails to meet their residency obligation or eligible refugee claimants who are pending a deciison by the IRB.

An Exclusion Order provides that the removed person cannot return to Canada for one year unless the person obtains ARC. For Exclusion Orders resulting from misrepresentation the bar is five years.  Examples of where an Exclusion Order would occur include foreign nationals who arrive at a port of entry without the appropriate documentation, foreign nationals who do not leave Canada by the end of their authorized stay and unauthorized work in Canada.

A Deportation Order results in a person being permanently barred from returning to Canada. Such a person may not return unless he/she receives ARC. Examples of where a Deportation Order would occur include criminality and national security concerns.

 » Read more about: Authorizations to Return to Canada  »

Read more ›

Overview of Detention

1st Nov 2010 Comments Off on Overview of Detention in Inadmissibility

On October 29, 2010, the Immigration and Refugee Board released Guideline 2 on Detention. The Guidelines are to assist Immigration Division members in determining whether or not to hold an individual in detention.

Read more ›

Federal Court Rules on Galloway Inadmissibility

28th Sep 2010 Comments Off on Federal Court Rules on Galloway Inadmissibility in Inadmissibility, Judicial Reviews

The Federal Court has released its decision on the legality of the “decision” to prohibit former British MP George Galloway from entering Canada for having committed terrorism or been a member of a terrorist organization.

Read more ›

SSNP Members Immigrating to Canada

15th Sep 2010 Comments Off on SSNP Members Immigrating to Canada in Inadmissibility

The Federal Court has affirmed that membership in the Syrian Socialist Nationalist Party (“SSNP”) can render an individual inadmissible to Canada pursuant to s. 34(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

Read more ›

Canada Begins Sharing Biometric Data

26th Aug 2010 Comments Off on Canada Begins Sharing Biometric Data in Inadmissibility, Refugees

Citizenship and Immigration Canada has released Operational Bulletin 226, which discusses the sharing of biometric information further to the Five Country Conference (FCC) High Value Data Sharing Protocol. The FCC (Canada, the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand) meets annually at the Deputy Minister level to discuss ways to improve immigration. In 2007, Canada, the US, the UK, and Australia (New Zealand was not yet a member) to committed to work towards the systemic exchange of biometric data for immigration purposes.

Biometric sharing has now commenced.

Read more ›

Espionage and Immigrating to Canada

29th Jul 2010 Comments Off on Espionage and Immigrating to Canada in Inadmissibility

Last updated on June 9th, 2020

Section 34(1) of Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Act provides, amongst other things, that a foreign national or Canadian permanent resident is inadmissible to Canada for engaging in an act of espionage that is against Canada or that is contrary to Canada’s interests, or being a member of an organization that there are reasonable grounds to believe engages, has engaged or will engage in espionage against Canada or that is contrary to Canada’s interests.  It is one of the most serious inadmissibilities in Canadian immigration law.

Guidelines

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada’s (“IRCC”) Enforcement Manual 2 – Inadmissibilities contains the following definitions and guidance to officers regarding how immigration officials are to determine whether someone is inadmisisble to Canada for espionage.

Espionage is defined as a method of information gathering by spying; that is, the gathering of information in a surreptitious manner, secretly seeking out information usually from a hostile country to benefit one’s own country.

Paragraph A34(1)(a) contains two possible allegations that could render a permanent resident or foreign national inadmissible to Canada for acts of espionage:

1. if the act of espionage is against Canada, or

2. if the act of espionage is contrary to Canada’s interests.

Espionage “against Canada” means espionage activities conducted by a foreign state or organization in Canada and/or abroad against any Canadian public or private sector entity on behalf of a foreign government. It may also include activities of a foreign nonstate organization against the Government of Canada, but does not include acts of industrial spying between private entities where no government is involved.

The following is a non-exhaustive list of activities that may constitute espionage that is “contrary to Canada’s interests”:

 Espionage activity committed inside or outside Canada that would have a negative impact on the safety,

 » Read more about: Espionage and Immigrating to Canada  »

Read more ›
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9

« Previous Page — Next Page »

DISCLAIMER

Please note that none of the information on this website should be construed as being legal advice. As well, you should not rely on any of the information contained in this website when determining whether and how to apply to a given program. Canadian immigration law is constantly changing, and the information above may be dated. If you have a question about the contents of this blog, or any question about Canadian immigration law, please contact the Author.

Newsletter

If you would like to receive e-mails containing either significant updates to Canadian immigration law or discussions of Access to Information Act results please subscribe.

Social Media

RSS
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Instagram

Categories

  • Business and Entrepreneur Immigrantion
  • Citizenship Applications and Revocations
  • Family Class (Spousal Sponsorships, Parents & Grandparents)
  • Humanitarian and Compassionate
  • Immigration and Refugee Board
  • Immigration Consultants
  • Immigration Trends
  • Inadmissibility
  • Judicial Reviews
  • Labour Market Impact Assessments
  • Maintaining Permanent Residency
  • Podcasts
  • Provincial Nominee Programs
  • Refugees
  • Skilled Immigration (Express Entry, CEC, FSWC, Etc.)
  • Study Permits
  • Tax and Trusts
  • Temporary Resident Visas
  • Uncategorized
  • Work Permits

Blogroll

Rosenberg on Immigration

About Us

Our firm practices almost exclusively in Canadian immigration matters, including work permit applications, provincial nominations, skilled worker applications, spousal sponsorships, applications on humanitarian and compassionate grounds, business applications, residency and sponsorship appeals, and judicial review applications at Federal Court.

We Are Here!

Contact

#600-555 West Georgia Street, Vancouver

+1 604-681-9887
+1 604-681-8087
See Map
Copyright © 2018 Canadian Immigration Law Blog. Developed by TECHTONE.
  • Privacy Policy