Federal Court |
|
Cour fédérale |
PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice O'Reilly
BETWEEN:
ADEELA BASHIR
and
AND IMMIGRATION
SUPPLEMENTARY REASONS AND ORDER
[1]
Having issued a
judgment allowing Mr. Hameed’s application for judicial review on May 21, 2009,
I invited counsel to make submissions on the issues of certification of a
question of general importance and costs.
I.
Potential
Questions:
[2] Counsel for Mr. Hameed submits that no questions of general importance arise. Counsel for the Minister proposes the following three questions:
1.
Does the Federal
Court have the jurisdiction under s. 18.1(3)(b) of the Federal Courts
Act to direct the Minister to grant an individual a specified number of
points under the Skilled Worker category of the Immigration and Refugee
Protection Regulations?
2.
Does the visa
officer have the authority under s. 78 of the Immigration and Refugee
Protection Regulations to determine what constitutes “full-time” or
“full-time equivalent” enrolment in a program of study?
3.
Does the Federal
Court have the authority to substitute its own assessment of foreign
documentation for that of the visa officer?
[3]
In respect of
Question 1, counsel’s written submissions make clear that the Court does have
the jurisdiction to issue directions under s. 18.1(3)(b). However, she
questions whether the Court ought to have done so in this case. In my view, that
does not amount to a question of general importance. I would also point out
that the Court clearly has the authority under s. 18.1(3)(a) to make a
decision that the officer ought to have made. In Mr. Hameed’s case, the Court
simply wished to ensure that the assessment of his educational credentials did
not give rise to yet a third application for judicial review.
[4] In respect of Question 2, it is obvious that visa officers have the authority to make decisions under s. 78 of the Regulations. However, those decisions are amenable to judicial review. This is not a question of general importance.
[5] In respect of Question 3, again it is obvious that the Court, on judicial review, must consider the reasonableness of an officer’s assessment of the evidence. This is not a question of general importance.
II. Costs:
[6]
Counsel for the
Minister submits that no special reasons justify an award of costs in this
case. Counsel for Mr. Hameed argues that special reasons arise from the fact
that Mr. Hameed had to come to the court twice on essentially the same
question.
[7] In my reasons for judgment, I made clear that the issues arising in the two judicial reviews were somewhat different. In my view, therefore, the circumstances do not warrant an award of costs. However, the circumstances did merit the particular order that I issued directing the assessment of Mr. Hameed’s educational credentials. In light of that order, there will be no order as to costs.
ORDER
1. No question of general importance is stated.
2. There is no order as to costs.
FEDERAL COURT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-2700-08
STYLE OF CAUSE: SAQIB HAMEED AND ADEELA BASHIR v. MCI
PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: January 14, 2009
SUPPLEMENTAL REASONS
APPEARANCES:
David Orman
|
|
Judy Michaely |
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
DAVID ORMAN Toronto, Ontario
|
|
John H. Sims, Q.C. Deputy Attorney General of Canada |