Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

[2012] 1 F.C.R. D-9

Citizenship and Immigration

Exclusion and Removal

Removal of Visitors

Judicial review of decision by visa officer denying applicant’s request for humanitarian, compassionate relief on basis that applicant, Armenian citizen, would suffer no hardship if returned to parents in Armenia—Applicant arguing that duty of fairness breached, decision under review rendered without consideration of all evidence—Applicant not forwarding information that parents moving to Russia—Not receiving letter from Citizenship and Immigration Canada requesting additional information—Term “correctly sent” in Kaur v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2009 FC 935 not merely referring to communication address supplied by applicant—Alavi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2010 FC 969 finding that proof of sending also required—Considering Kaur, Alavi, Court finding that upon proof on balance of probabilities that document sent, rebuttable presumption arising that applicant concerned received it, applicant's statement that document not received not rebutting presumption—To find that document “correctly sent”, document must have been sent to address supplied by applicant by means capable of verifying that document actually went on its way to applicant—No evidence herein that letter went on its way to applicant, therefore rebuttal presumption not arising—Application allowed.

Ghaloghlyan v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) (IMM-863-11, 2011 FC 1252, Campbell J., judgment dated November 2, 2011, 7 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.