Date: 20010817
Docket: IMM-3704-00
Neutral citation:2001 FCT 916
BETWEEN:
MUHAMMAD ARSHAD KHAN
Applicant
-and-
THE MINISTER OF
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
[1] This application for judicial review challenges the decision of a Visa Officer refusing the applicant's application for permanent residence on two grounds. The Visa Officer granted a total of 60 points when 70 were needed.
[2] As for the first ground, the Visa Officer gave only 5 points out of 13 possible ones for education, on the basis that the documents presented were of "no significant probative value", after having questioned the applicant about the subject matter of the courses, he allegedly studied at the University of Karachi. I can see no basis on which to interfere with his assessment on this issue, it being essentially a factual matter and entitled therefore, to substantial deference.
[3] On the second issue of suitability, the Visa Officer awarded only 2 units out of 10. While there was a hint of a possible "double counting" in the material in that language skill was mentioned in the notes relating to suitability it is clear that the assessment of the Visa Officer was not based on language skill but on all the material before him and the interview he undertook. I am not persuaded that he erred in his decision on this matter.
[4] Counsel for the applicant urged that a question be certified relating to whether it was legitimate for the Visa Officer to ask the applicant questions relating to his studies in probing his educational achievements in light of the Immigration Regulations, 1978. I am not inclined to certify the question as it would not be determinative of the case. Even if the points for education were increased to the maximum allowed, which is unlikely, the applicant would still be 2 points short of the requirements. As for the case of Hameed, which was cited, the point differential would only have been 1 point, something that might have had an effect on the points granted there for suitability. It is highly unlikely that two or more points would have been obtained in this case something that the Visa Officer specifically addressed. Hence, even if the certified question were answered favourably to the applicant, he would still be unsuccessful in his application.
[5] The application will therefore, be dismissed.
"A. M. Linden"
Judge
Toronto, Ontario
August 17, 2001
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
DOCKET: IMM-3704-00
STYLE OF CAUSE: MUHAMMAD ARSHAD KHAN
Applicant
-and-
THE MINISTER OF
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
DATE OF HEARING: FRIDAY, AUGUST 17, 2001
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: LINDEN J.A.
DATED: FRIDAY, AUGUST 17, 2001
APPEARANCES: Mr. Max Chaudhary
For the Applicant
Ms. Mielka Visnic
For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Chaudhary Law Office
Barristers & Solicitors
18 Wynford Drive, Suite 707
Toronto, Ontario
M3C 3S2
For the Applicant
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date: 20010817
Docket: IMM-3704-00
BETWEEN:
MUHAMMAD ARSHAD KHAN
Applicant
-and-
THE MINISTER OF
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
Date: 20010817
Docket: IMM-3704-00
Toronto, Ontario, Friday the 17th day of August, 2001
PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Linden
BETWEEN:
MUHAMMAD ARSHAD KHAN
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
ORDER
This application is dismissed.
"A. M. Linden"
Judge