CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
Status in Canada |
Permanent Residents |
Zhong v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
IMM-1381-04
2004 FC 1636, Blanchard J.
22/11/04
11 pp.
Judicial review of decision by visa officer at Canadian Embassy in Beijing, China, denying application for permanent residence in Canada under immigrant investor category-- Applicant acting as principal applicant, also requesting permanent resident status for wife, young son--Applicant citizen of China--In 1998, applying for permanent resident visa under category of entrepreneur--Visa refused--Officer not convinced applicant acquired funds legally--Whether officer erred in concluding not satisfied applicant not member of inadmissible class under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), s. 36(2)--Open to officer to find conflicting, insufficient evidence presented to satisfy him applicant's net worth derived from legal, legitimate sources-- But such finding not necessarily leading to determination applicant member of inadmissible class of persons described in IRPA, s. 36(2)--Person not becoming member of inadmissible class of persons described in s. 36(2) for sole reason violated prescription of IRPA, Regulations--Must be in evidence information supportive of elements necessary to base finding of inadmissibility under IRPA, s. 36--In this case must be evidence of criminality based on act which would constitute offence in China and which, if committed in Canada, would constitute offence under Act of Parliament-- No such evidence before officer--Officer also failed to clearly identify criminal act for which found applicant inadmissible under s. 36(2)--No evidence to support finding of inadmissi-bility under IRPA, s. 36(2)--Officer's finding of facts made in perverse, capricious manner--Decision patently unreasona-ble, constituting reviewable error--Application allowed-- Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 2 7, s. 36.