Khakoo v. Canada ( Minister of Citizenship and Immigration )
IMM-358-95
Gibson J.
15/11/95
11 pp.
Judicial review of immigration officer's denial of application for permanent resident status-Applicants, woman and dependent son, Tanzanian citizens-Arriving in Canada in 1990-Application sponsored in 1994 by daughter of female applicant-Denial based on fact applicants receiving welfare benefits in Canada for four years; continuing lack of support of sponsor demonstrating unwilling to provide for needs of applicants, both of whom considered persons described in Immigration Act, ss. 19(1)(b), 19(2)(d)-S. 19(1)(b) prohibiting admission of any persons who there are reasonable grounds to believe unable, unwilling to support selves, except those persons who have satisfied immigration officer that adequate arrangements, other than those involving social assistance, made for their support-S. 19(2)(d) prohibiting admission of persons not complying with any of conditions or requirements of Act or Regulations-(1) Sponsor having right of appeal under s. 77(3)-Statutory right of appeal belonging to one individual not barring right of judicial review belonging to another: Grewal v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1993), 62 F.T.R. 308 (F.C.T.D.)-(2) Visa officer acting under Immigration Regulations, 1978, s. 6-Within terms of s. 6(1)(b), applicants sponsored, (i) sponsor giving undertaking, (ii) sponsor not in default in respect of obligations assumed under any other undertaking, and (iii) express opinion of another immigration officer sponsor able to fulfil undertaking-Sponsor's undertaking signed by immigration officer June 20, 1994, six months before interview with visa officer, indicating applicants satisfying immigration officer within exception in s. 19(1)(b)-Nothing in s. 19(1)(b) indicating immigration officer who has been satisfied must be visa officer who is considering all aspects of application for permanent residence-Nothing in Act, Regulations indicating visa officer having authority to override previous satisfaction of immigration officer even in circumstances where evident visa officer in substantial disagreement with colleague as to adequacy of arrangements for support of applicants other than through social assistance-As applicants within exception to s. 19(1)(b), visa officer exceeded jurisdiction in finding applicants to be within inadmissible class-(3) No onus on visa officer to notify applicants of concern about long reliance on social assistance-Act, s. 8 imposing burden of proving right to come into Canada on applicant for admission-(4) Questions certified as to whether sponsor's statutory right of appeal under s. 77(3) barring applicant from applying for judicial review and whether, when inland immigration officer approving sponsor's undertaking, visa officer retaining right to refuse application for permanent residence on ground of s. 19(1)(b) where evidence applicant receiving social assistance in Canada-Immigration Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-2, ss. 8(1), 19(1)(b) (as am. by S.C. 1992, c. 49, s. 11), (2)(d), 77(3) (as am. idem), 82.1(2) (as am. idem, s. 73), 83(1) (as am. idem)-Immigration Regulations, 1978, SOR/78-172, s. 6 (as am. by SOR/79-167, s. 2; 92-101, s. 3)-Federal Court Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7, ss. 18.1 (as enacted by S.C. 1990, c. 8, s. 5), 18.5 (as enacted idem)-Federal Court Rules, C.R.C., c. 663, R. 1618 (as enacted by SOR/92-43, s. 19).