By Sukhram Ramkissoon
Earlier this yr, I highlighted the plight of a Guyanese household consisting of two kids who’re residents of Canada pleading to be reunited with their dad and mom, who had been previously everlasting residents.
By means of background, Amir and his dad and mom had been granted refugee standing in Canada in 2004 and have become everlasting residents in 2006. Nonetheless, they misplaced their everlasting resident standing in 2019 when their refugee claims had been cessated underneath the Immigration and Refugee Safety Act (“IRPA”) based mostly on their repeated returns to Guyana.
Earlier than their elimination to Guyana in July 2019, they filed H&C functions. The daughter was a 14-year-old Canadian citizen on the time of the applying and was left behind within the care of the prolonged household in Canada. The minor daughter was born in Canada.
Within the kids’s bid to be reunited with their dad and mom, they filed two humanitarian and compassionate functions, and each had been refused. They challenged their final detrimental determination to the Federal Courtroom of Canada for evaluate.
Of their judicial evaluate, they challenged the choice during which the H&C software was based mostly on a number of elements, together with their institution in Canada, their daughter’s psychological well being situation, and one of the best pursuits of their Canadian youngster.
On the listening to, the decide discovered the detrimental determination flawed in its evaluation of one of the best pursuits of the kid, rendered the choice unreasonable, and granted the applying for judicial evaluate.
Amir, who was beforehand represented by my son, Ronald Ramkissoon, had his H&C software authorised and have become a Canadian everlasting resident. Amir’s mum or dad’s H&C software was refused on August 28, 2020, however that call was returned for redetermination, as their problem to the Federal Courtroom of Canada was profitable. Sadly, the redetermination resulted in a second refusal on September 29, 2023.
The second refusal is the choice topic to judicial evaluate, that I’m discussing in right this moment’s article.
The discovered decide agreed that the choice was unreasonable relating to one of the best pursuits of Amir’s sister. The evaluation of the sister’s greatest pursuits is indecipherable. The choice critiques proof submitted for example the affect of the dad and mom’ separation from their daughter on her greatest pursuits and notes that the elements assist the reunification of the daughter along with her dad and mom in Canada. These elements are given “constructive weight.”
It’s hoped that on this third request, the immigration officer will take into account this judgment, contemplating the discovered decide’s ruling, given the Federal Courtroom has agreed with the applicant’s arguments on three events, discovering that the earlier officer’s determination was unreasonable.
Good luck and hope Amir’s household will quickly be reunited in Canada.
SUKHRAM RAMKISSOON is a member of CICC and focuses on Immigration Issues at No. 3089 Bathurst Avenue, Suite 219A, Toronto, Ontario, Telephone 416 789 5756.
