Karimi v. Canada (Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship)
On July 20, 2021, a compelling judgement was made in the case of IMM-1372-21, a decision that provided a significant outcome for the applicant, Amirhomayoun Karimi. This case was presided over by the Honourable Mr. Justice Manson in Vancouver, British Columbia.
Karimi, represented by the esteemed Samin Mortazavi of Pax Law Corporation, brought forth an appeal against the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, who acted as the respondent in this case. This legal tug of war centered on Karimi’s refused study permit application.
In a turn of events, a motion was filed by the Respondent on July 7, 2021, under Rule 369 of the Federal Courts Rules, to reconsider and possibly overturn several decisions related to Karimi’s study permit application. These included the refusal of Karimi’s application and the demand for it to be reviewed anew by a different visa officer.
On January 27, 2021, Karimi’s initial study permit application was denied by a visa officer. The reason given was that Karimi hadn’t demonstrated that he would depart from Canada once required. The decision drew upon the officer’s assertion that Karimi had limited job prospects in Iran, his home country.
However, in a critical overlook, the visa officer failed to consider a crucial piece of evidence – a letter from Behtavan Physiotherapy Clinic. The letter stated that upon Karimi’s graduation in kinesiology, he would be offered employment at the clinic. This guarantee of employment directly contradicted the officer’s claim of limited job opportunities.
After careful examination of the case’s evidence and arguments from both sides, Justice Manson ruled in favor of the motion proposed by the Respondent. He decided that the initial refusal of Karimi’s study permit application was unfounded. He noted that an oral hearing was unnecessary given the case’s disposition. Moreover, the case could be fairly concluded without the additional time and expense of such a hearing.
Justice Manson ordered the original decision to be set aside and that Karimi’s study permit application be reviewed afresh by a different visa officer. He further mandated that Karimi be given an opportunity to submit additional materials in support of his application. This redetermination process is expected to provide a fair and independent review, resulting in an independent decision.
The cost of these proceedings will be borne by each party separately. This ruling is a testament to the efficiency and effectiveness of the judicial review process in ensuring fair adjudication, especially in cases involving Immigration and Citizenship matters.
Written submissions were provided by Samin Mortazavi, the representative of the applicant, and François Paradis, the representative of the respondent. This case highlights the crucial role that experienced legal counsel, like those at Pax Law Corporation, can play in ensuring that justice prevails.
It’s important to remember that every case is unique and outcomes may vary. If you’re facing similar immigration challenges or have questions about the judicial review process, don’t hesitate to reach out to Pax Law Corporation for expert legal advice.