June 29, 2019
Henderson & Lee’s new Legal Forum is coming up on June 29 to share on immigration law!
There are more decisions of revoking citizenship or permanent resident status and removal orders in recent years. Many immigration service agencies definitely feel that CIC is increasingly strict in processing all kinds of immigration applications. As the chances of the application being rejected are increasing, the reasons given by the officers with respect to such decision are more confusing and inconsistent.
Some well-known examples are:
- CIC reviewed thousands of applications over a period of ten years and decided to revoke many then applicant’s citizenship or permanent resident status on the ground of misrepresentation.
- CIC reviewed hundreds of spousal applications under the family union categories and decided to reject many sponsorship application on the ground of false marriage or relationship.
- CIC officers at the port of entry cancel travelers’ student visa and issue removal order on the ground that the students did not attend enough classes.
- CIC officers at the port of entry cancel return workers’ work permits and issue removal order on the ground that the workers had worked outside of the limits of the work permits.
- CIC officers at the port of entry cancel permanent residents’ Maple Card and issue removal order on the ground that the travel records the permanent resident show it is impossible for such person to meet the residence requirement.
- CIC suddenly changed the requirement of medical examination which caused thousands of applicants of family union fail after years of waiting.
- CIC suddenly cancel the federal skill worker category and terminated tens of thousands of applicants’ immigration dream.
Most of the decision made by CIC officers are within the scope of “discretion” power given by the legislator and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. According to the common law principle, the Court shall always defer to the officers’ finding and decision UNLESS the decision was found to wrong in law or patently unreasonable. For this reason, in order to be responsible to the client, whenever we decide to take on a case to appeal or file for judicial review, we always first assess whether the officer’s decision is wrong in law or is patently unreasonable. If the decision does not found to be wrong or unreasonable, we may advise the client not to waste money and time to go through the appeal process.
This time, we would like to look into the most recent court decisions and hopefully, by doing so, we are able to provide some guidelines to answer most of the questions you have regarding immigration application and appeal.
H&L Law Forum will be held in English and Chinese-Mandarin.
Cameron Lee, senior partner of H&L, starting legal practice in China since 1993 and in BC since 2011.
Daniel Henderson, senior partner of H&L, attending all levels of court and administrative tribunals since 1989.
Jenny Zheng, licence immigration consultant, handling immigration applications in H&L under the supervision of lawyers.
Time: June 29, 2019, from 3:00 to 5:00pm,
Location: Focus Media Studio, No. 3 Road, Richmond
Reservation: by phone (604)558-2258; by WeChat Account:
Live audience may ask questions during or after the recording.
Seats are extremely limited. Please make sure to book your seat before you come.