in Case Law › Canada (Federal)
in vLex Canada

75268 results for Case Law › Canada (Federal)

  • vLex Rating
  • Arabambi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 98

    [1]  This is an application under s 72(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27 [IRPA], for judicial review of the decision of the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada [RPD], dated November 14, 2018 [Decision], denying the Applicants’ refugee and person in need of protection claims under ss 96 and 97 of the IRPA.

  • Rendon Segovia v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 99

    [1]  In this judicial review, the Applicants, a family of four from Mexico, challenge the refusal of their refugee claim appeal. After having read their submissions, and then upon hearing oral arguments, Applicants’ counsel persuaded me that reviewable errors occurred, which require me to send this appeal back to the tribunal for redetermination. I advised the parties that written reasons...

  • Qureshi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 88

    [1]  The applicant is a citizen of Pakistan.  She was born there in 1943.  She lived in the United States from 1998 until 2009 but she has lived in Canada since February 2009.

  • Abolupe v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 90

    [1]  This is the judicial review of a decision by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, Refugee Appeal Division (RAD), dated April 29, 2019, confirming the decision of the Refugee Protection Division (RPD), pursuant to s 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27 (IRPA), and concluding that the Applicant is neither a Convention Refugee nor person in need...

  • Ebrahimshani v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 89

    [1]  This is an application for judicial review of a decision by a visa officer with the Visa Section of the Embassy of Canada in Warsaw, Poland, denying the Applicant’s application, pursuant to s 100(2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, SOR/2002-227 (IRP Regs), for permanent residence in the self-employed persons class.

  • Calle Henao v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 84

    [1]  The principal applicant, Eliana Maria Calle Henao, and her minor daughter are citizens of Colombia. They claim to have a well-founded fear of persecution in Colombia by the Urabeños, a neo-paramilitary group that is heavily involved in drug trafficking.  The group allegedly attempted to extort money from the principal applicant’s ex-husband’s parents.  When her former in-laws did not...

  • Zhang v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 75

    [1]  Liling and Jianning Zhang are a married couple. They are citizens of China. They have three minor children. Jia Yi and Jia Hoa are citizens of Venezuela, where they were born. Jia Lin is a citizen of Hong Kong, where he was born. Liling and Jianning Zhang are former permanent residents of Venezuela.

  • Patel v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 77

    [1]  The Applicant, Mr. Patel, seeks judicial review of the refusal of his study permit application, which I will grant due to fatal flaws in the decision.

  • Georgetown Rail Equipment Company v. Tetra Tech Eba Inc, 2020 FC 64

    [1]  In 2011, Georgetown Rail Equipment Company [Georgetown] was issued Canadian Patent 2,572,082 [082 Patent] titled “System and Method for Inspecting Railroad Track”. According to the “Summary of the Disclosure” contained in the 082 Patent:

  • Peter v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 60

    [1]  This application is for judicial review of a decision of a Senior Immigration Officer [the Officer] of Citizenship and Immigration Canada dated April 11, 2019 [the Decision], in which the Officer denied the Applicant’s application for permanent residence on humanitarian and compassionate [H&C] grounds. This application was brought pursuant to subsection 72(1) of the Immigration and

  • Elanco Canada Limited v. Canada (Health), 2019 FC 1455

    [1]  In this Section 44 Access to Information Act, RSC, 1985, c A-1 [ATIA] judicial review application, Elanco Canada Limited (Elanco) seeks an Order prohibiting Health Canada from disclosing information about their Fortekor veterinary medication.  As much of the information at issue is confidential, the hearing was held in-camera.  I agreed to provide the parties with a Confidential...

  • Krumm v. The Queen, 2020 TCC 7

    [1]  On August 1, 1997, during what is often referred to as the dot-com boom or the tech bubble, Mr. Krumm entered into an Asset Purchase Agreement pursuant to which he purchased a 50% interest in computer application software (the “Software”) owned by Intersports Acceleration Corp. (“IAC”) for $2.8 million, of which $700,000 was payable by cheque and $2.1 million was payable by way of Long

  • Reyes Garcia v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 66

    [1]  This case concerns the decision of a Canada Border Services Agency (“CBSA”) Border Services Officer (the “Officer”) to cancel the Applicant’s electronic travel authorization (“ETA”) on a finding that the Applicant had misrepresented on the ETA and was therefore inadmissible for misrepresentation.

  • Bains v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 57

    [1]  The applicant, Amritveer Singh Bains, applied for a work permit based on his marriage to a foreign national who was studying full-time in Canada. In a letter dated February 6, 2019 an Officer in the visa section at the High Commission of Canada in New Delhi, India, refused the application. The Officer found Mr. Bains inadmissible to Canada under paragraph 40(1)(a) of the Immigration...

  • Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v. Kassab, 2020 FCA 10

    [1]  Paragraph 35(1)(b) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 (Act), renders a foreign national inadmissible for:

  • Dleiow v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 59

    [1]  This application for judicial review challenges a decision made by the Immigration Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (Board) by which the Applicant Seifeslam Dleiow, a foreign national, was found to be inadmissible to Canada under paragraph 34(1)(e) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA). The determinative issue presented is whether the Board’s...

  • Reference re Environmental Management Act, 2020 SCC 1
  • Naman v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2020 FC 58

    [1]  This is an application for judicial review. The Applicant, who is self-represented, seeks to set aside a decision made on January 3, 2019 by a member of the Immigration Appeal Division [IAD] of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada [IRB] that dismissed the Applicant’s application to re-open her appeal of a departure order made against her [the Decision].

  • Sangha v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 62

    [1]  This case concerns the decision of an immigration officer (the “Officer”) dated February 20, 2019, to deny the Applicants’ temporary resident visas (“TRVs”).  The Applicants are citizens of India, and a family of three.  The three files were considered together on judicial review.  The Applicants had applied for TRVs to visit their relatives for a wedding anniversary celebration in...

  • Cao v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 52

    [1]  This application is for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Protection Division [RPD] of the Immigration and Refugee Board dated April 23, 2019 [the Decision], in which the Panel Member [the Member] denied the Applicant’s claim for refugee protection because he was not credible and because his claim did not have a nexus to a Convention ground. This application was brought...

  • Morriseau v. The Queen, 2020 TCC 5

    [1]  These Reasons pertain to the Appeals of Christopher Morriseau and Miranda Smoke from reassessments made by the Canada Revenue Agency (the “CRA”), on behalf of the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”), for the 2012 and 2013 taxation years. For each of those years, Mr. Morriseau and Ms. Smoke, who are registered as Indians [1] for the purposes of the Indian Act, [

  • X.Y. v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 39

    [1]  The Applicant is a citizen of Ethiopia, who claimed refugee status in Canada. Her original claim was based on her fear of persecution by Ethiopian authorities because of her participation in an anti-government protest in 2016. The Refugee Protection Division (RPD) denied her claim. She appealed to the Refugee Appeal Division (RAD).

  • Ennis v. Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FC 43

    [1]  This is the judicial review of a decision by the Canadian Human Rights Commission [Commission] made pursuant to paragraph 44(3)(b) of the Canadian Human Rights Act, RSC 1985, c H-6 [Act]. The Commission’s decision dismisses the complaint of the Applicant, John Ennis, despite the Investigator’s Report recommending that the matter be referred to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal [Tribuna

  • Canada v. Klesse, 2020 FC 45

    [1]  The Plaintiff brings a motion for summary judgment, seeking to recover the amount of $128,430.43, plus interest and costs, against the Defendant, claiming that the Defendant is in default of his repayment obligations for funds received from the Advance Payment Program under the Agricultural Marketing Programs Act, SC 1997, c 20 [AMPA]. The Plaintiff argues that this case should be...

  • Canada v. Moodie, 2020 FC 46

    [1]  The Plaintiff brings a motion for summary judgment, seeking to recover the amount of $45,619.11, plus interest and costs, against the Defendants, claiming that the Defendants are in default of their repayment obligations for funds received from the Advance Payment Program under the Agricultural Marketing Programs Act, SC 1997, c 20 [AMPA]. The Plaintiff argues that this case should be...

  • Canada v. McKinna, 2020 FC 48

    [1]  The Plaintiff brings a motion for summary judgment, seeking to recover the amount of $520,930.20, plus interest and costs, against the Defendant, claiming that the Defendant is in default of his repayment obligations for funds received from the Advance Payment Program under the Agricultural Marketing Programs Act, SC 1997, c 20 [AMPA]. The Plaintiff argues that this case should be...

  • Canada v. Harman, 2020 FC 47

    [1]  The Plaintiff brings a motion for summary judgment, seeking to recover the amount of $777,427.27, plus interest and costs, against the Defendant, claiming that the Defendant is in default of his repayment obligations for funds received from the Advance Payment Program under the Agricultural Marketing Programs Act, SC 1997, c 20 [AMPA]. The Plaintiff argues that this case should be...

  • Abdelmoneim v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 41

    [1]  The applicant, Mrs. Rania Hashem, applied for a study permit in April 2019 in order to attend a three-year Computer Programming and Analysis program at Seneca College in Toronto, Ontario. The visa section of the Embassy of Canada in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, refused the application in a letter dated May 27, 2019. The two officers who assessed the application were not satisfied...

  • Lin v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 34

    [1]  This judicial review application is concerned with a decision of the Refugee Protection Division [RPD] of April 8, 2009. The claim for Refugee Protection pursuant to sections 96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c 27 [the Act] was dismissed. The judicial review application is made pursuant to section 72 of the Act.

  • Ntamag v. Canada (Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship), 2020 FC 40

    [1]  Josée Florence Ngo Ntamag came to Canada on a student permit that was valid until November 30, 2018. She completed her studies and received an official confirmation of completion on December 4, 2018. However, she waited until February 16, 2019 to request that her status be changed to that of a visitor, so that she would not be without status until and when she applied for a work permit

  • Free signup to view additional results