Federal Court

Immigration and Citizenship



Settlement funds not equating to economic establishment

Foreign national (BJ), 53-year-old Indian citizen, applied for permanent resident visa as federal skilled worker, and included his spouse and two children as accompanying family members. BJ’s self-assessed points were one point short of minimum amount for senior managers - financial, communications and other business services, but he submitted he had CAD $3,000,000 in assets and would transfer CAD $1,000,000 when they immigrated. Citizenship and Immigration Canada Program Support Officer (PSO) informed BJ that his application received positive determination of “eligibility to be processed,” but that final decision on his “eligibility to be selected” would be made by visa office. Immigration Officer (IO) refused BJ’s application because he was not satisfied BJ would be able to become economically established in Canada. BJ brought application for judicial review. Application dismissed. It was reasonable for IO to state and find that settlement funds did not equate to economic establishment for purpose of obtaining permanent resident visa in federal skilled worker class. While settlement funds might be relevant consideration when visa officer makes substituted evaluation under s. 76(3) of Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, they do not, in and of themselves, equate to economic establishment or likelihood of skilled worker to become economically established in Canada. IO’s determination was reasonable. While BJ had significant settlement funds, he provided no evidence as to his efforts to seek employment in Canada. IO was entitled to review all factors to determine whether points awarded properly reflected BJ’s ability to economically establish in Canada. PSO did not purport to make any decision regarding merits of BJ’s application.

Jain v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2017), 2017 CarswellNat 1463, 2017 FC 377, Keith M. Boswell J. (F.C.).

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Law Times reports that there is no explicit rule that lawyers in Ontario must be competent in the use of technology. Do you think there should be explicit rules spelling out the expectations of lawyers’ in terms of tech use in their practice?