Permanent residence decision was distinct from authorization to return to Canada refusal

Immigration and Citizenship – Admission - Appeals and judicial review

Applicant M sought judicial review of decision of Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) dismissing appeal from refusal of sponsored application to admit his father and mother as permanent residents . M was told father was inadmissible because he had been subject of earlier enforced removal order and authorization to return to Canada (ARC) would be required . M's application for ARC was refused as was sponsorship application . M unsuccessfully brought application for judicial review . M appealed . Appeal dismissed . Language of subsections 63(1) and 67(1) of Immigration and Refugee Protection Act does not confer upon ability to consider merits of ARC refusal. Reality was that permanent residence decision was distinct from ARC refusal. Attempt to fold ARC refusal at issue into distinct permanent residence decision with view to benefiting from right of appeal conferred by Act could not succeed. It was also reasonable for IAD to conclude that notwithstanding its inability to consider merits of ARC refusal, it could allow appeal of permanent residence decision if sufficient humanitarian and compassionate considerations were at play. There was no limiting language in paragraph 67(1)(c) of Act to suggest that this special relief, which included IAD’s ability to allow appeal from negative permanent residence decision, could not be granted in cases involving underlying ARC refusal.

Momi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) (2019), 2019 CarswellNat 2121, 2019 FCA 163, Johanne Gauthier J.A., Richard Boivin J.A., and Mary J.L. Gleason J.A. (F.C.A.); affirmed (2018), 2018 CarswellNat 192, 2018 CarswellNat 349, 2018 FC 110, 2018 CF 110, R.L. Barnes J. (F.C.).

Case Law is a weekly summary of notable civil and criminal court decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Canada and all Ontario courts. These cases may be found online in WestlawNext Canada. To subscribe, please visit store.thomsonreuters.ca

Free newsletter

Our daily newsletter is FREE and keeps you up to date on all the developments in the Ontario legal community. Please complete the form below and click on subscribe for daily newsletters from Law Times.

Recent articles & video

Amid enactment of sweeping law enforcement Bill C-75, LSO seeks status quo for students, paralegals

LSO must stand up for racialized licensees, says prospective returning bencher

OBA summit to bring together legal sector equality advocates

Federal government names Canadian Accessibility Standards Development Organization officers

Baker McKenzie adds senior tech strength to global M&A team

Alexander Holburn opens Toronto office

Most Read Articles

Appeal court ‘withdraws’ real estate decision after it was signed in error

Challenges continue for legal aid practitioners despite funding boost from Ottawa

Province should be cautious using ADR for domestic violence cases, say lawyers

Canadian law firms spending more on legal tech, says Thomson Reuters