Federal Court (Canada)

[1] These reasons concern a motion brought by Mr. Jahazi for costs in two proceedings.

[1] The Applicant, Ayoola Oke, seeks review of a decision of the Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) dismissing his appeal. The RAD upheld the Refugee Protection Division (RPD) finding that Mr. Oke was not a convention refugee as he did not demonstrate a serious possibility of persecution in Nigeria. The RAD concluded that the evidence failed to establish, on a balance of probabilities, that the...

[1] The Applicant wishes to obtain permanent residence in Canada on humanitarian and compassionate [H&C] grounds. An Officer with Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada [IRCC] rejected Mr. Hashimi’s application. Mr. Hashimi now seeks judicial review of this application.

[1] The Applicant seeks judicial review of a decision dated January 30, 2024, by an officer of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (“IRCC”), which denied his application for an extension of his work permit (“Decision”).

[1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision by the Refugee Appeal Division [RAD] of the Immigration and Refugee Board, dated November 17, 2023 [Decision].

[1] On April 24, 2025, the Court issued an Order granting a motion by counsel for the Applicant and removing them as solicitor of record for the Applicant in this matter, given the breakdown in the solicitor and client relationship [Order].

[1] Ms. Espano, a citizen of the Philippines, is seeking judicial review of the refusal of a permit to study in the Occupational Health and Safety Management Program at Centennial College. A visa officer refused her application because she did not provide sufficient evidence of her relationship with her sponsor and of the availability of the sponsor’s funds. Moreover, the officer found that the...

[1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision by a benefits validation officer of the Canada Revenue Agency [CRA], dated July 31, 2024 [the Decision], which found the Applicant ineligible for certain Canada Emergency Response Benefit [CERB] payments she had previously received.

[1] The Applicant, Alex Martinez, asks the Court to review the decision of the Social Security Tribunal (SST) Appeal Division dated July 30, 2020. The Appeal Division refused his request to appeal the decision of the SST General Division. The General Division found that he did not qualify for employment insurance benefits because he had zero hours of insurable employment earnings in the...

[1] The Applicant, Surin Chudchamnan, seeks judicial review of the decision refusing his application for a work permit and finding him inadmissible to Canada for misrepresentation. He had applied to work at a Thai restaurant in Canada, but his application was refused and he was found inadmissible because the Officer did not believe his work history.

[1] The Defendant and Moving Party has brought a motion in writing for an Order for security for costs to be made against the Plaintiffs and Responding Parties pursuant to Rules 369 and 416(a) and (g) of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106 (the Rules). The Defendant asks this Court to order the Plaintiffs to post security for the Defendant’s estimated costs of this proceeding, up to and...

[1] The Applicant, Canadian Inspection Ltd [CIL] seeks judicial review of two decisions made by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission [Commission] concerning fees levied under Part 3 of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission Cost Recovery Fees Regulations, SOR/2003-212 [Regulations], for 2023–2024. CIL submitted two complaints on August 16, 2023, under the Dispute Resolution Mechanism for Fee...

[1] This is the judicial review of a decision of a visa officer [Officer] dated February 20, 2024 [Decision] refusing the application for a work permit of Baljinder Singh [Applicant] under the Temporary Foreign Worker Program [TFWP], as the Officer was not satisfied that the Applicant (1) would leave Canada at the end of his stay, pursuant to paragraph 200(1)(b) of the Immigration and Refugee...

[1] In the summer of 2023, the Applicant – Mr. Marc Maric – attended the “Superstash” cannabis exposition in Denver, Colorado. On arrival back in Canada, the Canada Border Services Agency [CBSA] conducted an examination of the Applicant’s possessions and seized several hundred cannabis seeds in his possession. Mr. Maric contested this seizure, maintaining in part that the seeds were not cannabis.

[1] The Applicant Gilbert Bigio appeals an Order of Associate Judge Michael Crinson, made in his capacity as Case Management Judge [CMJ]. The CMJ granted a motion by the Attorney General of Canada [AGC] to strike the Applicant’s Notice of Application without leave to amend.

[1] The Court has before it three interrelated applications for judicial review. The Applicants Imelda Hollero Achacoso and Dinesh Gangadharan seek judicial review of decisions by an immigration officer, dated February 7, 2024, and February 12, 2024, respectively, refusing their applications for permanent resident visas under the start-up business class in relation to the same proposed start-up (r

[1] The Applicant, Universal Ostrich Farms Inc., challenges two related decisions made by the Respondent, Canadian Food Inspection Agency [the CFIA or the Agency], under section 48 of the Health of Animals Act, SC 1990, c 21 [the Act]. The first decision, a Notice to Dispose issued on December 31, 2024, ordered the destruction of all ostriches on the farm after laboratory tests confirmed...

[1] Mr. Ugoeke, a citizen of Nigeria, is seeking judicial review of the refusal of a permit to study for a Bachelor’s degree in computing or information technology at the University of Manitoba. A visa officer refused his application because he failed to bring evidence of sufficient financial resources.

[1] The Applicant, Mohammad Ghamoushi Ramandi, a citizen of Iran, came to Canada in April 2017 as a visitor. He claimed refugee status alleging that the Iranian authorities were seeking him due to his conversion to Christianity, a fact which the Iranian authorities discovered while he was in Canada.

[1] This judgment arises from two patent infringement actions brought under subsection 6(1) of the Patent Medicines (Notice of Compliance Regulations), SOR/93-133 [PMNOC Regulations]. The patent at issue is Canadian Patent No. 2,645,810 [810 Patent]. The innovative drug relating to the action is SOLIRIS® (eculizumab), which is an intravenously administered biologic drug that is used to treat...

[1] This is the judicial review of a decision of a visa officer [Officer] dated August 14, 2023 [Decision] refusing the application for a study permit of Sara Tahoonchitorghabeh [Principal Applicant or PA], as the Officer was not satisfied that the PA (1) would leave Canada at the end of her stay, pursuant to s 216(1)(b) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, SOR/2002-227 [IRPR],...

[1] This Application for judicial review concerns the June 12, 2022 election held at Key First Nation (KFN). Although the judicial review Application was filed on July 12, 2022, moving this Application to a hearing has been delayed on multiple occasions primarily due to the Applicants’ failure to meet filing deadlines imposed through the case management process.

[1] This is the judicial review of the decisions of an Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada [IRCC] Officer refusing the application of Rasheed Ali for Authorization to Return to Canada [ARC] and a Temporary Resident Permit [TRP].[1]For the reasons set out below, I am granting the application.

[1] The Applicants seek judicial review of the refusal of their application for permanent residence from within Canada on humanitarian and compassionate (“H&C”) grounds.

[1] The Government of Canada initiated discussions aimed at granting an equity stake in the Trans Mountain pipeline project to Indigenous groups affected by the project. The Minister of Finance [the Minister], however, decided that the applicants were ineligible to take part in those discussions, mainly because they are not recognized by Canada as the holders of rights recognized and affirmed by...

[1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision dated February 8, 2024, of the Immigration Appeal Division (“IAD”) to dismiss the Applicant’s appeal of the refusal of his permanent resident travel document because he did not meet the residency requirement to be present in Canada for 730 days in the five years preceding the application, as set out in subparagraph 28(2)(a)(i) of the...

[1] The Applicants, Anita Horvathne Majoros [Anita], Attila Horvath [Attila], Alex Horvath [Alex], Leila Melani Horvath [Leila], Reka Valeria Racz [Reka], and Gabor Mate [Gabor] are all Roma citizens of Hungary. In June 2018, the Applicants gained Convention refugee protection in Canada.

[1] The Applicant, Gabisiu Olakunle Olaribigbe, seeks judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) dated February 16, 2024 dismissing his appeal and confirming the Refugee Protection Division’s (RPD) decision that he is neither a convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under section 96 and subsection 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001,

[1] The Respondent brings this motion to strike the Applicant’s application for leave and for judicial review under Rule 369 of the Federal Courts Rules, SOR/98-106. The Applicant seeks an order of mandamus compelling the Respondent to decide their study permit application submitted on March 1, 2024.

[1] This Order and Reasons address four motions brought in the within action, which asserts claims based in contract and intellectual property arising from the Plaintiff’s supply of design documentation related to the conversion of a ship.