Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

Citizenship and Immigration

Status in Canada

Persons with Temporary Status

Judicial review of visa officer’s decision refusing applicant’s application for extension of his study permit, finding applicant inadmissible for misrepresentation under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 (Act), s. 40(1)(a) — Applicant, citizen of China, receiving non-final acceptance letter from York University in 2018 through services of educational consultant (CVP) — Submitting application for extension through Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) online portal — As acceptance letter not final, application not considered complete — Applicant required to resubmit application — Also providing high school transcripts from Canada — Officer finding that transcripts submitted to IRCC showing applicant attending different high school from  one indicated in transcripts on file with York University, presumably submitted by CVP — Applicant maintaining that documents submitted to IRCC genuine, having no knowledge of any incorrect documents submitted to York University by CVP — Whether fact that no false documents were submitted directly to IRCC constituting exception to general principle that applicants are responsible for misrepresentation by third parties — No basis upon which to find that application falling within Act, s. 40(1)(a) on information before officer — Duty of candour overriding principle of Act, underlying s. 40(1)(a) — Principles of interpretation including that s. 40 to be given broad interpretation in order to promote its underlying purpose; applicant having duty of candour to provide complete, honest, truthful information in every manner when applying for entry — Record not indicating how officer became aware of false transcript submitted to York University — Clear that documents submitted to IRCC did not include false transcript — Therefore, no one making misrepresentation directly or indirectly to IRCC on behalf of applicant that induced or could induce error in administration of Act — Within officer’s discretion to refuse study permit application if not satisfied with applicant’s enrollment at York University — However, officer’s application of misrepresentation provisions not reasonably sustained by statutory scheme — Misrepresentation decision quashed — Application allowed.

Wang v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) (IMM-2037-19, 2020 FC 262, Mosley J., reasons for judgment dated February 18, 2020, 9 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.