Canadian immigration law provides that a person who makes an application must answer truthfully all questions put to them for the purpose of the examination. One of the most difficult issues to resolve when an individual is immigrating to Canada are allegations from the Government of Canada about misrepresentation. Section 40(1)(a) of Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Act states provides that a permanent resident or a foreign national is inadmissible to Canada for misrepresentation for directly or indirectly misrepresenting or withholding material facts relating to a relevant matter that induces or could induce an error in the administration of Canadian immigration law. Every visa applicant has a duty of candour to provide complete, honest and truthful information when applying for entry to Canada. Any misrepresentation, whether direct or indirect, that either induces, or could induce, an error by a visa officer in the performance of his or her duties, can result in a person being barred from Canada for five years. Intention A significant issue that often arises is whether or not a misrepresentation has to be intentional. The jurisprudence consistently provides that in order for a finding of misrepresentation to be made an applicant does not have to intend to … Read More
Rehabilitation Applications
Section 36(3)(c) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act provides the legislative basis for rehablitation applications. It states that: 36(3)(c) the matters referred to in paragraphs (1)(b) and (c) and (2)(b) and (c) do not constitute inadmissibility in respect of a permanent resident or foreign national who, after the prescribed period, satisfies the Minister that they have been rehabilitated or who is a member of a prescribed class that is deemed to have been rehabilitated. IRCC Rehabilitation Guide The following PDF is IRCC’s United States Criminality Assessment Guide. As well, here is an internal IRCC New York memo which provides context on the number of rehabilitation applications that they receive. Where To Submit IRCC’s preference is that rehabilitation applications be submitted separate from permanent or temporary residence applications. Statistics Jurisprudence In Hadad v. Canada (The Minister of Citizenship, Immigration, and Multiculturalism), 2011 FC 1503, the Federal Court affirmed several important principles of rehabilitation applications, including that: The Minister should take into consideration the unique facts of each particular case and consider whether the overall situation warrants a finding that the individual has been rehabilitated; rehabilitation is forward looking; and an officer commits a reviewable error if they too much importance to … Read More
Immigration Consequences of a Conviction and Sentence in Canada
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.
Determining Equivalency – Whether a Criminal Offence Will Make You Inadmissible to Canada
An individual who has been convicted of offense outside of Canada needs to determine what the equivalent offense would be in Canada.
Expungements, Pardons and Inadmissibility
A question that often gets asked is whether a United States pardon or expungement results in a person no longer being inadmissible to Canada. Expungements As noted in IRCC’s 2021 United States Criminality Assessment Guide (the “IRCC NY Guide“), in reviewing a rehabilitation application that includes an expungement or other permanent relief mechanism, it is recommended that a thorough review be conducted to determine whether the relief issued by the individual state equates to the conditions of a record suspension in Canada. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Saini, [2001] F.C.J. No. 1577 is the leading case in relation to the recognition of foreign pardons. There, the Federal Court of Canada created a three pronged test to establish whether Canadian law will recognize a foreign pardon or expungement. The test is: The foreign legal system as a whole must be similar to the Canadian one; The content, aim and effect of the foreign law in question must be similar to the Canadian law; and No other valid reason exists that would compel Canadian authorities not to recognize the effects of the foreign law. According to the IRCC NY Guide, IRCC has determined that the United States possesses legal traditions … Read More
Inadmissibility Due to Non-Compliance with the Act
Individuals can be inadmissible to Canada for numerous reasons, including criminality, misrepresentation, medical issues, and non-compliance with Canadian immigration legislation. The latter reason, non-compliance with the Canadian immigration legislation, can seem extremely vague. Fortunately, the Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Guidelines contains a list of the different frequently used reasons for declaring someone inadmissible for non-compliance with the Act. They are: Entering Canada to remain on a permanent basis without first obtaining a permanent resident visa. Entering Canada to remain on a temporary basis without first obtaining a temporary resident visa. Entering Canada to study without first obtaining a study permit. Entering Canada to work without first obtaining a work permit. Not answering questions truthfully or producing required relevant documents. Not submitting to a medical examination. Not holding a medical certificate that is based on the last medical examination. Not holding the required documents to enter Canada. Not establishing that the person will live Canada by the end of the authorized period. Where a person is subject to an enforced removal, returning to Canada without authorization. Working without authorization. Studying without authorization. Not leaving Canada at the end of the authorized period. Not reporting to a port of entry examination without … Read More
RIMbits Revealed (May 2010)
The following are some excerpts from the May 2010 RIMbits. RIMbits are messages sent from National Headquarters to missions overseas. The May 2010 RIMbits on admissibility consisted of seven questions and answers. I have reproduced three of them for free below. Please note that the questions and answers below should not be viewed as legal advice. Rather, they are simply reproductions of how CIC senior management answered specific questions from visa offices in May 2010. Seized Travel Document Q) We were notified by the authorities that a permanent resident travelling on a Canadian travel document has been charged with: (1) ______ (2) _____ and (3) _____. According to local authorities, the permanent resident has been released on bail with the condition that she surrender her travel document and that “Stop Orders” are placed with the Immigration exit controls at airports. We have been formally requested not to issue a new travel document to this permanent resident “until the matters have been disposed.” As the charged person is not a Canadian, the Consular Section has referred this case to us. Although she has not done so at this point, it is possible that in the near future, this permanent resident … Read More
Data Confirms Removals from British Columbia Up Since Conservatives Took Office
We have obtained through an Access to Information and Privacy Act request data showing the Canada Border Services Agency’s removal statistics for people in British Columbia from 2003 – 2012 (2012 is partial). I have reproduced below two pages of the data. We have also obtained a chart showing Removal Orders from British Columbia by Country of Birth by Year, which I have not published. If you wish to see it please contact me and I will send it to you by e-mail. As the chart below demonstrates, removals from British Columbia has increased under the Conservatives. Interestingly, it peaked in 2008 and 2009, before begin to decline. There is a lot of interesting information contained in the data below, including tables showing: Removal Orders by Type; Removal Orders by Refugee Claimant vs. Non Refugee Claimant; Removal Orders by Status in Canada; Removal Orders by Inadmissibility Ground; Removal Orders by Gender; and Removal Orders by Age. Please note that the Tables below are a copy of an official work by the Government of Canada which was obtained through an Access to Information and Privacy Act Request, and to my knowledge is not otherwise publicly available. While I believe that the data … Read More
Income Tax Statements and Inadmissibility
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 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 … Read More