Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

Citation:

Khan v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration),

2010 FC 983, [2010] 4 F.C.R. D-8

IMM-1196-10

Citizenship and Immigration

Status in Canada

Permanent Residents

Judicial review of immigration officer’s decision denying application for permanent residence under skilled worker class—Application assessed against requirements of Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27, Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, SOR/2002-227—Applicant holding bachelor’s degree, programming diploma, two master’s degrees for total of 19 years of full-time studies—Regulations, s. 78(3) providing that points not awarded for two or more educational credentials—Immigration officer determining 16 years number of full-time years required for obtaining master’s degree in Bangladesh—Officer also deciding diploma not qualifying as increasing number of years required to attain highest academic credential—Officer thus awarding 22 points for education, pursuant to Regulations, s. 78(2)(e)—Regulations clear, no points awarded for two master’s degrees—No reviewable error committed—Applicant relying on McLachlan v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2009 FC 975, wherein Regulations, s. 78(4) (dealing with special circumstances) held to be engaged where academic credential achieved but not specified years of study—However, applicant not putting forward any special circumstances that officer failing to consider—According to Bhuiya v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2008 FC 878, where applicant achieving academic credential in less years than specified, Regulations, s. 78(4) allowing visa officer to award points corresponding to number of years of education, not full points of level of academic credential attained—Differing judicial views concerning assessment of educational qualifications justifying certification of question of general importance—Application dismissed.

Khan v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) (IMM-1196-10, 2010 FC 983, Heneghan J., judgment dated October 1, 2010, 10 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.