Canada Immigration Case-law Canada Murugan, IMMIGRATION — Selection and admission — Permanent residence applications by Joy Stephen, Polinsys

Judgement for this Case: Click here!
IMMIGRATION — Selection and admission — Permanent residence applications — Principal applicant, aged 65, was citizen of Sri Lanka — In 2007, principal applicant applied for permanent residence in Canada in family class — Application was sponsored by son and included then dependent daughter — In 2010, principal applicant and daughter applied for visitor’s visa, which was refused because officer was not satisfied that principal applicant would return to Sri Lanka — In 2011, applicant completed further documents for permanent residence application — Applicant and daughter incorrectly answered no to question of whether they had been refused visitor’s visa — Visa officer refused application for permanent residence on basis that principal applicant and daughter were inadmissible for misrepresentation pursuant to s. 40(1)(a) of Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (Can.) — Applicants applied for judicial review — Application granted — When assessing misrepresentation, all relevant information and circumstances should be considered — Consideration of circumstances included consideration of whether, on facts of case, misrepresentation could have induced error in administration of Act — Fact that visa was refused because principal applicant might have stayed in Canada could not have any impact on decision reached on application for permanent residence — It could not have caused officer to reach erroneous decision and could not have induced error in administration of Act