An interesting IMMIGRATION case for Judicial review, McKenzie v. Canada— General
Case law is not meant for people interested to apply for immigration to Canada, but may be used by those who feel the system is not fair, to gain an understanding of the recourse available in Canada. Content for this video is sourced from information distributed by Thomson Reuters. Judgement for this case is attached in my blog reportersreport.com as a pdf document
New evidence — Foreign nationals’ visitor status expired in 2012 — Female foreign national was granted student visa but it was never issued since she never appeared at port of entry as required — Female foreign national had not been advised of this requirement by immigration consultant — Foreign nationals unsuccessfully applied for exemption on humanitarian and compassionate grounds from requirement that applications for permanent residence be made from outside Canada — Foreign nationals would have presented further evidence but for alleged incompetence of immigration consultant — Foreign nationals brought application for judicial review and submitted further evidence — Voir dire was conducted to determine admissibility of evidence — Evidence admissible in part — Evidence relating to status of complaint against immigration consultant was admissible — This evidence went to proving alleged incompetence of immigration consultant — Evidence that would have been submitted but for alleged incompetence of immigration consultant was admissible for same reason — Evidence relating to progress of foreign nationals’ Canadian-born child and male foreign national’s recent work was inadmissible since it had not been before immigration officer
McKenzie v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (June 8, 2015, John A. O’Keefe J., Federal Court) 255 A.C.W.S. (3d) 715