“Incompetence of counsel” in the Canadian immigration law context refers to situations where an applicant seeks to set aside a decision (e.g., refusal, removal order, etc.) on the grounds that their legal or immigration representative provided ineffective or negligent assistance, which prejudiced their case. Arsheep Kahlon joins to discuss the key elements of how this argument works.
The Inside Canada vs. Outside Canada Sponsorship Process
One of the quirkier features of Canadian immigration law is the distinction between what is generally referred to as the “Inside-Canada Sponsorship” process and the “Outside-Canada Sponsorship” process. The biggest myth is that if a couple is residing in Canada then they must use the “Inside-Canada Sponsorship” process. This is not true. However, each program contains advantages and disadvantages vis-a-vis the other, and I have provided a list of the key features and requirements of each program below. Inside-Canada Process Outside-Canada Process The spouse/common-law partner must be in a genuine, conjugal relationship that was not entered into for the primary purpose of acquiring an immigration benefit. The spouse/common-law partner must be in a genuine, conjugal relationship that was not entered into for the primary purpose of acquiring an immigration benefit. The spouse/common-law partner must reside together in Canada. The spouse/common-law partner do not have to reside together in Canada. As well, once a common-law relationship is established, periods of separation will not change their common-law status if there is a short separation that does not sever the common-law partnership. The applicant must live with the spouse/common-law partner inside Canada during the duration of processing. The applicant can live with … Read More
Maintaining Permanent Residency Status While Working Abroad
Examining the “working abroad for a Canadian business” exception to the “two years out of five” rule for maintaining permanent residency status.
Borderlines Podcast #56 – Responding to Deportation Letters, with Michael Greene
We discuss issues involving the deportation of long term permanent residents for criminality. Michael Greene, Q.C. is an immigration lawyer in Calgary. He served as the National Chair of the Canadian Bar Association’s Citizenship & Immigration Section in 2000-2001. He is representing Jaskirat Singh Sidhu in his immigration and deportation matters. 5:45 – What are the grounds for deporting a permanent resident for criminality? 13:00 – How does the appeal process work? 17:00 – What are the factors in deportation. 19:00 – An overview of the history of the law involving the deportation of permanent residents. 26:00 – What is the probability of success for a permanent resident in avoiding deportation once proceedings start? 36:00 – Stays of removal 41:00 – Strategies and tips for responding to procedural fairness letters involving removal. [UPDATE – DECEMBER 20, 2023] The Federal Court in Sidhu v Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2023 FC 1681 has upheld a decision of the Canada Border Services Agency to refer Mr. Sidhu to the Immigration and Refugee Board. Citing the Federal Court of Appeal decision in Obazughanmwen v Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2023 FCA 151, the Court set forth the general principles applicable to … Read More
Humanitarian & Compassionate Applications – The Establishment Factor
Subsection 25(1) of Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Act provides immigration officers with the flexibility to grant on humanitarian and compassionate (“H&C“) exemptions to overcome the requirement of obtaining a permanent residence visa from abroad and/or to overcome class eligibility requirements and/or inadmissibilities. H&C applications may be based on a number factors, including: establishment in Canada; ties to Canada; the best interests of any children affected by their application; factors in their country of origin (this includes but is not limited to: Medical inadequacies, discrimination that does not amount to persecution, harassment or other hardships that are not related to a fear of return based on refugee determination factors; health considerations; family violence considerations; consequences of the separation of relatives; inability to leave Canada has led to establishment; and/or any other relevant factor they wish to have considered not related to a fear of return based on refugee determination factors. The purpose of this post is to focus on the establishment factor. Establishment in Canada Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada’s Guidelines (the “Guidelines“) provides that the degree of an applicant’s establishment may be assessed by analyzing the following questions: Does the applicant have a history of stable employment? Is there a pattern of sound financial management? … Read More
Borderlines Podcast – #155 – A Plan to Attract Talent to Canada, with Martin Basiri
Martin Basiri is a Co-Founder and the former Chief Executive Oofficer of ApplyBoard, a Start-Up Visa Program company that in 2021 reached a valuation of $3.2-billion. He is currently the Founder of and CEO of Passage, which enables immigrants and international students by providing financial access. Martin is part of Build Canada, an organization that helps Canadian entrepreneurs share their ideas for a bolder, richer, freer country. We discuss Martin’s proposal Great People, Greater Canada: A Talent First Immigration Strategy for Canada, which contains specific proposals to reposition Canadian immigration law, and particuarly its economic class, as one focused on bringing the best talent to Canada, rather than other political considerations that currently seem to be prioritized.
Applying for a Study Permit
Generally, to be eligible for a study permit, a potential student must: present a letter of acceptance from the educational institution where she intends to study. This school must be a Designated Learning Institution; be able to both pay the tuition fees of the program as well as be able to financially support themselves and any accompanying financial members. Depending on the person’s country of origin, they may be required to take out a GIC with a designated Canadian bank; be able to cover the cost of transportation to and from Canada; pass any medical examinations; possibly show proof of health insurance; demonstrate that they are a bona fide student and that they will leave Canada at the end of the period authorized by their stay. Not every student needs a study permit. Exempt students include: persons seeking to study for a short-term program (unless they wish to work on campus). minor students in Canada. Approval Rate Statistics The following charts were obtained through Access to Information Act requests. Here is the Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (“IRCC”) approval rate for study permit applications based on certain countries of origin from 2009 – 2013. Here is a breakdown of approvals for India, China, … Read More
Borderlines Podcast #154 – Expanding The Presumption of Innocence to Immigration Law
On March 14, 2025, the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in John Howard Society of Saskatchewan v. Saskatchewan (Attorney General), 2025 SCC 6. Prior to the case, in Saskatchewan’s provincial correctional institutions, inmates charged with disciplinary offences had to appear before a disciplinary panel, where the standard of proof was a balance of probabilities, even for major offences that may result in up to 10 days of disciplinary segregation or the loss of up to 15 days of earned remission. The Supreme Court found that this violated sections 7 and 11(d) of the Charter, and held that to the extent that the law permitted the imposition of disciplinary segregation and loss of earned remission for an inmate disciplinary offence on a lower standard of proof, it is inconsistent with the Constitution and must therefore be declared to be of no force or effect. As noted by the dissent, the case could have implications for Canadian immigration law.
Borderlines Podcast #153: The Big Reveal: Home Care Worker Immigration Pilot Programs
Deanna discusses the new Ministerial Instructions rolling out the long awaited caregiver pilots on 31 March 2025.
Medical Treatment and H&C
In Khorsand v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 540, Madam Justice Aylen ruled that when assessing the mental health effects of removal it is insufficient for officers to simply state that the country of citizenship has medical facilities to deal with healthcare. Rather, officers must assess the actual evidence that it is the removal that can cause mental decline.