[2011] 3 F.C.R. D-5
Citizenship and Immigration
Exclusion and Removal
Inadmissible Persons
Judicial review of visa officer’s decision refusing application for permanent resident visa as skilled worker because applicant criminally inadmissible pursuant to Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27, s. 36(1)(b)—Applicant convicted of criminal offence in Korea—Advised of refusal because determined that if committed in Canada, offence convicted of in Korea would be punishable under Canadian Criminal Code, R.S.C., 1985, c. C‑46, s. 249(3) by maximum term of imprisonment of at least 10 years—Applicant meeting all conditions for rehabilitation set out in Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, SOR/2002‑227, s. 18(2)(a) except for s. 18(2)(a)(i), namely that offence punishable in Canada by maximum term of imprisonment of less than 10 years—Whether term “not exceeding ten years” in Criminal Code falling within maximum term of “less than 10 years” in Regulations, s. 18—Under Act, s. 36(3)(c) person may overcome criminal inadmissibility arising from offences committed outside Canada by applying to Minister for rehabilitation or if person falling within prescribed class deemed to have been rehabilitated—Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Kelley, 2007 FC 82, dealing with similar issue; deci‑sion holding that offence punishable for term “not exceeding ten years” necessarily including possibility of 10 year sentence—Federal Court not only bound to follow interpretation in Kelley but interpretation therein correct, only interpretation possible in present case—Language of Criminal Code, s. 249(3) clear; French version thereof making extremely clear that maximum sentence of 10 years included—Little case law existing dealing with rehabilitation section of Regulations, Act as whole—Application dismissed.
Sun v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) (IMM‑2875‑10, 2011 FC 708, Gauthier J., judgment dated June 16, 2011, 16 pp.)