Chand v. Canada ( Minister of Citizenship and Immigration )
IMM-3822-98
Cullen J.
13/9/99
9 pp.
Applicant applied for permanent resident status after having obtained permanent employment validation and six years of working as cook, foreign food: Indian sweets maker-Applicant has worked six years for same (very satisfied) employer, saving up nest-egg of $20,000, and employer willing to continue to employ applicant-High demand for applicant's occupation-Application denied on basis failed to amass sufficient units of assessment to qualify for immigration to Canada-Application for judicial review successful (IMM972-97) and matter referred back for redetermination-Second application refused-Application for judicial review of second refusal-Application allowed-Visa officer has clearly made same sort of error for which first visa officer faulted by first judge-Second visa officer again appears to have minimized, or indeed ignored, applicant's current status vis-à-vis his permanent employment validation, employer's written assurance would continue to employ applicant, and high demand for applicant's chosen occupation-For visa officer to conclude applicant should be faulted for not upgrading or enhancing his skills so as to make himself more marketable, flying in face of reasonableness in view of high demand for occupation-No need to upgrade skills-Concern applicant could find himself unemployed in near future simply without foundation and constituting mere speculation of irrelevant nature-After all, occupation in high demand in Canada, warranting maximum allowable units of assessment under occupational demand factor-Applicant having shown has successfully established himself in Canada in economic sense-Applicant skilled at chosen occupation, for which high demand, has amassed savings, has been continuously employed and has obtained permanent employment authorization-If this not demonstrating ability to become successfully established, what could?-As delays very costly to applicant, and as parties have agreed some form of compensation should be paid to applicant to enable him to pay for trips necessary to secure documentation which had lapsed due to delay, parties requested to negotiate sum to be paid by respondent to applicant-Questions for certification as to whether visa officer erred in award of points in category of personal suitability; as to Court's jurisdiction to declare applicant likely to become successfully established in Canada, given that issue one which visa officer called upon to decide; as to Court's jurisdiction to direct applicant be awarded certain number of points under category of personal suitability; as to Court's jurisdiction, in award of costs, to order respondent to compensate applicant for expenses unrelated to actual cost of litigation.