By Sukhram Ramkissoon

According to the Federal Court website, a 38-year-old Trinidadian whose wife holds a valid Canadian study permit for her Master’s in Business Administration at a Canadian University was recently refused an open spousal work permit. I will refer to him as “Noor” which is not his real name.

As a result of Noor’s negative decision, he applied for judicial review at the Federal Court of Canada which recently dismissed his application. The facts according to the case are as follows. The immigration application form required Noor to answer “Have you ever been refused a visa or permit, denied entry, or ordered to leave Canada or any other country or territory?”

Noor checked YES and provided the following explanation: “I was denied a United States of America visa in 2009/2010 and reapplied successfully in 2017. I applied to enter Canada by applying for a visitor visa which was successfully issued in 2019.”

However, Noor did not disclose his recent interaction with the US customs in January 2020. In October 2022, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) sent him a letter requesting an explanation for his failure to provide details regarding his US visa revocation on his application form.

Noor immediately responded and explained that he believed he voluntarily canceled his US Visa in January 2020 and did not realize he needed to include this information on the immigration form. He traveled to the US on January 18, 2020, and was subjected to several hours of questioning and searches by the US customs which he believed to be racially motivated.

Approximately 4 to 5 hours after arriving at the US customs, Noor alleged that he voluntarily decided to inform the US officer that he wanted to return to his home country and was no longer interested in entering the US. Noor alleges the US customs officer told him his decision to cancel the visa would not impact his family and that he could reapply for a new visa upon his return to his home country. He attached transcripts to his response regarding the questioning conducted by US officials, which indicate that the US found him inadmissible and that he was not forthcoming during questioning.

In January 2023, the Visa Officer refused his work permit application and found him inadmissible to Canada under immigration law for directly or indirectly misrepresenting or withholding material facts relating to a relevant matter that induces or could induce an error in the administration of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA).

The Visa Officer did not find Noor credible that he would think it was unnecessary to include information about his interaction with US authorities in his application. The Visa Officer found that Noor failed to provide information in his response to overcome these concerns.

When a finding of misrepresentation is made, an applicant will not only be denied the visa for which they applied; they will also be inadmissible to Canada for the five years from the date of that decision. An applicant must always answer truthfully to all questions posed to them otherwise they may face serious consequences as in this case of Noor.

At the Federal Court hearing, it was concluded that Noor contradicted his assertion that he voluntarily cancelled his US Visa in January 2020. The questioning transcripts demonstrate that he did not voluntarily depart from the United States, and was found inadmissible by a US customs official.

The judge stated “In my view, this wording makes it clear the Officer finds the misrepresentation important enough to affect the process and the outcome of the Applicant’s Visa Application. It was reasonable for the Visa Officer to find that the materiality was obvious and that it was not credible for the Applicant to believe that information was neither relevant nor germane (or material) to his Visa Application” and dismissed the judicial review application.

All applicants should read and understand each question on an immigration application form, and most importantly answer truthfully.  In this case, Noor may have believed he answered truthfully, however in retrospect he did not.  It is always better to provide all the information at hand, than to filter and provide only what the applicant believes to be necessary.  What is necessary, is for the visa officer or an immigration officer to fully understand the facts from the information provided, as it is their reasoning and understanding of these facts that determine what is necessary to make their decision.

SUKHRAM RAMKISSOON is a member of CICC and specialises in Immigration Matters at No. 3089 Bathurst Street, Suite 219A, Toronto, Ontario. Phone 416 789 5756.