Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

Citation:

Hasan v. canada (Citizenship and Immigration),

2010 FC 1206, [2011] 1 F.C.R. D-8

IMM-6455-09

Citizenship and Immigration

Status in Canada

Permanent Residents

Judicial review of visa officer’s decision rejecting application to become permanent resident under skilled worker category—Principal focus of application herein points awarded in education category—Applicant having two Master’s degrees, 18 years of full-time education studies—Only awarded 22 out of possible 25 points –– Existing majority view in case law not precedent for determining present application—Two decisions on which certified questions have been posed failing to consider correct application of Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, SOR/2002-227, s. 78(3)(b)(i) which, in present circumstances, would have produced different result—At issue in present case whether factors of attaining Master’s or Doctoral degree, completing requisite full-time studies stated in Regulations, ss. 78(2)(f) should be read conjunctively or disjunctively—Visa officer’s interpretation of Regulations emphasizing words of s. 78(3)(a) that education points shall not be awarded cumulatively on basis of more than one single educational credential—Visa officer erring in law by failing to consider correct application of Regulations, s. 78(3)(b)(i), stating that points to be awarded, including under s. 78(2)(f), on basis of single educational credential that results in highest number of points—In order for legislative intention to operate to provide benefit to applicant with two Master’s degrees, factors named in s. 78(2)(f) must be read disjunctively—Therefore, if applicant having two Master’s degrees plus total of 17 years or more of full-time studies, last of degrees must be assessed together with applicant’s complete academic history—Same question as in previous case law certified—Application allowed.

Hasan v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) (IMM-6455-09, 2010 FC 1206, Campbell J., judgment dated November 30, 2010, 15 pp.)

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.