Focus On
NEW In-House Counsel | Insurance | Intellectual Property | Immigration | Natural Resources | Real Estate | Tax



Thursday, October 20, 2016 @ 8:00 PM

Number of options available to skilled U.S. professionals and their dependants

For months, Canadians watched the Republican presidential race in disbelief as we wondered whether it would be possible for Donald Trump to clinch the nomination. Now, in the midst of the presidential election, we still cringe at the thought he may just make it all the way to the Oval Office. ... [read more]

Thursday, October 20, 2016 @ 8:00 PM

Immigration Law - IMMIGRANTS - Practice and judicial review - Appeals to Court of Appeal or Supreme Court of Canada

Appeal by Liang and her solicitor Wong from a Federal Court order and costs award. Liang sought reconsideration of a Federal Court decision denying leave to commence judicial review of a decision by the Immigration Appeal Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board. The Federal Court found that the reconsideration motion had no merit, as there was no indication the order denying leave did not accord with the reasons for judgment, or otherwise resulted from omission or oversight. The Federal Court found that Liang’s solicitor, Wong, attacked the integrity of the Court during his conduct of a motion brought improperly and without reasonable cause. The Court awarded costs of $1,000 against Wong personally. Liang and Wong appealed. The Court of Appeal Registry sought directions on the basis s. 72(2)(e) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) barred appeals from decisions refusing leave to commence judicial review proceedings. The Minister submitted that the notice of appeal should be removed from the Court file with the file closed. The appellants submitted that their appeal should continue. ... [read more]

Thursday, October 20, 2016 @ 8:00 PM

Streamlined out of existence

Immigrants who obtained Canadian citizenship through the process of naturalization can lose their status as citizens if it is later determined that they obtained that status through fraud, for example by falsifying the amount of time that they lived in Canada in order to meet the residency requirement to qualify for citizenship. ... [read more]

Thursday, October 13, 2016 @ 8:00 PM

Canada urged to stop detaining immigrant children

Canada must make the best interests of children its primary consideration when deciding whether to hold individuals in immigration detention if it wants to meet its commitments under international law, experts say. ... [read more]

Thursday, October 13, 2016 @ 8:00 PM

Immigration Law - Refugee protection - Practice and judicial review - Natural justice - Duty of fairness - Right to counsel

Appeal by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration from the Federal Court’s dismissal of the Minister’s application for judicial review of a decision by the Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) with respect to the refugee claims of a couple from Venezuela. The couple entered Canada legally on study permits and subsequently claimed refugee status. After completing basis of claim forms, the couple was interviewed by an officer from Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC officer), who found they were eligible to claim refugee protection. Their claims were referred to the Refugee Protection Division (RPD). Approximately two weeks later, a “hearing advisor” employed by the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) required the respondents to attend before him that day for an interview. The couple’s lawyer was not advised of the interview appointment and the couple was not asked if they wanted counsel present. The interview proceeded in the absence of counsel. Questions were posed by a hearing advisor about statements the couple made on the basis of claim forms. Four days later, the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness provided notice of intention to intervene in the respondents’ refugee claims. The intervention was based on two solemn declarations made by the hearing advisor and two documents prepared by third parties relating to country conditions in Venezuela. The couple sought to exclude the solemn declarations from evidence at their hearing before the RPD. The RPD accepted the solemn declarations, finding that the hearing advisor had jurisdiction to conduct the interview and that the couple’s right to counsel was not triggered because the couple was neither arrested nor detained and because they never asked to have their counsel present. The RPD dismissed the couple’s refugee claim, finding that they were not credible witnesses and that the incidents they reported experiencing in Venezuela were not as a result of their opposition to the government. The RAD concluded that the hearing advisor’s solemn declarations should have been excluded because the couple’s counsel had not been advised of the scheduled interview, which breached principles of natural justice and fairness. The RAD considered the appropriate remedy to refer the refugee claims back to the RPD for re-determination by a different member. The Federal Court had concerns about why the interview was conducted by the hearing advisor when the Minister had no security of criminality concerns about the couple. It found the RPD erred in finding the officer retained jurisdiction to interview the couple after their refugee claim was referred to the RPD. The Court also rejected the RPD’s position that the interview was merely a routine information gathering exercise, finding that the couple had a statutory right to have counsel present during any material aspect of the proceeding, including the interview. ... [read more]

Thursday, October 06, 2016 @ 8:00 PM

Ottawa professor seen as making 'huge contribution' to refugee law in Canada

One of the nation’s strongest advocates for refugees is urging Canadians to continue their support for the millions of people around the world who are fleeing violence and persecution in their homelands. ... [read more]

Thursday, September 15, 2016 @ 8:00 PM

Legal Profession - Regulation of profession - Law societies and governing bodies - Disciplinary proceedings - Disciplinary procedure - What constitutes misconduct

Appeal by a solicitor, Sas, from a disciplinary decision by the Law Society of British Columbia. The appellant was a sole practitioner in the area of immigration law. In 2010, she joined a large law firm and undertook the process of closing open dormant files. The appellant found 200 files with outstanding financial balances. In a concerted effort to close the files, the appellant, through her bookkeepers, withdrew trust monies to pay fees and disbursements without having prepared and delivered bills to clients. The amounts billed and applied, and any corresponding amounts written off, were calculated with the objective to achieve zero balances in the client files. The matter came to the attention of the Law Society and an investigation ensued. The appellant took corrective measures, delivering bills to clients, and, in some cases, returning money to trust accounts. At the ensuing disciplinary hearing, the panel found that the appellant engaged in professional misconduct, as she had known or ought to have known of the bookkeepers’ activities. Sas appealed. ... [read more]

Thursday, July 07, 2016 @ 8:00 PM

Immigration Law - Removal and deportation - Removal from Canada - Pre-removal risk assessment

Not applicable ... [read more]

Thursday, May 19, 2016 @ 8:00 PM

Evaluating Express Entry

Last year Canada revolutionized the intake of federal applications from professionals wishing to immigrate as permanent residents. While some have benefited from these changes, many talented individuals and Canadian employers have been hurt by them. ... [read more]

Thursday, October 22, 2015 @ 8:00 PM

Hitting the immigration wall

For decades, Canada developed a reputation as one of the most welcoming countries in the world. Since 2008, this is sadly no longer true. It is now much harder to get into Canada, to stay here permanently, and to become a citizen. ... [read more]