CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
Status in Canada |
Permanent Residents |
Dhillon v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
IMM-3271-01
2002 FCT 1265, Kelen J.
6/12/02
6 pp.
Judicial review of visa officer's decision applicant's son not dependent son as defined in Immigration Regulations, 1978--Applicant's son included on application as dependent son based on status as full-time student--Dependent son defined in Regulations, s. 2(1)--Visa officer found enrolment and physical presence in college not sufficient to qualify as dependent son--Applicant submitted visa officer cannot impute qualitative aspect towards determination of whether individual full-time student--In accordance with Sandhu v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2002] 3 F.C. 280 (C.A.), visa officer entitled to conduct qualitative assessment in determining whether applicant's son a genuine full-time student--Court must ensure visa officer did not err in making qualitative assessment--In present case, visa officer did not act in bad faith and officer did consider relevant evidence--No allegation of breach of natural justice--Visa officer explained applicant's son only attending college for immigration purposes--Reasons cited by visa officer have rational basis--Application dismissed--Immigration Regu-lations, 1978, SOR/78-172, s. 2(1) "dependent son" (as enacted by SOR/92-101, s. 1).