Mai v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
The court held that a visa officer in the described circumstances does not owe a duty to ensure that the applicant received notice of a scheduled interview; the Motions Judge did not err in concluding no duty was breached and the appeal is dismissed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2001 FCA 100
- Parties
- Appellant: Jianzhong Mai; Respondent: The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 2 April 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Immigration Appeal / Appeal From Motions Judge (federal Court of Appeal)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Visa Officer Duty, Notice of Interview, Immigration Consultant, Certification of Question
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Jianzhong Mai
Appellant
The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Immigration Appeal / Appeal From Motions Judge (federal Court of Appeal)
Legal Issues
- 1 Does a visa officer owe a duty to ensure an applicant received notice of a scheduled interview when the mailing address is that of an immigration consultant and the officer is aware the consultant has encountered difficulties?
- 2 Whether the additional two grounds of appeal have merit
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that a visa officer in the described circumstances does not owe a duty to ensure that the applicant received notice of a scheduled interview; the Motions Judge did not err in concluding no duty was breached and the appeal is dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Certified question answered in the negative: a visa officer does not owe the described duty.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Mai v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2001-04-02 Neutral citation 2001 FCA 100 File numbers A-599-99 Notes Digest Decision Content Date: 20010402 Docket: A-599-99 Neutral citation: 2001 FCA 100 CORAM: ISAAC J.A. SEXTON J.A. SHARLOW J.A. BETWEEN: JIANZHONG MAI Appellant - and - THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent Heard at Toronto, Ontario, Monday, April 2, 2001 Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on Monday, April 2, 2001 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: SHARLOW J.A. Date: 20010402 Docket: A-599-99 Neutral citation: 2001 FCA 100 CORAM: ISAAC J.A. SEXTON J.A. SHARLOW J.A. BETWEEN: JIANZHONG MAI Appellant - and - THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario on Monday, April 2, 2001) SHARLOW J.A. The Motions Judge concluded, on the basis of the record before him, that the Visa Officer breached no duty owed to the applicant. We are not persuaded that he erred in reaching that conclusion. The Motions Judge certified the following question: Does a visa officer, who is processing an application for permanent residence that designates a mailing address for the applicant that is the mailing address of an immigration consultant, owe a duty to the applicant to ensure that the applicant has received notice of a scheduled interview in circumstances where the visa officer becomes aware that the immigration consultant has encountered difficulties that may impact on the service provided by the immigration consultant to the applicant? We would answer this question in the negative. Two additional grounds of appeal were also argued. We see no merit in either of those grounds. This appeal will be dismissed. "Karen R. Sharlow" J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record DOCKET: A-599-99 STYLE OF CAUSE: JIANZHONG MAI Appellant - and - THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent DATE OF HEARING: MONDAY, APRIL 2, 2001 PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: SHARLOW J.A. DATED: MONDAY, APRIL 2, 2001 APPEARANCES: Ms. Mary Lam For the Appellant Mr. Marcel Larouche For the Respondent SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Mary Lam Barrister & Solicitor 206 Bloor Street West, Suite 3 Toronto, Ontario M5S 1T8 For the Appellant Morris Rosenberg Deputy Attorney General of Canada For the Respondent FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL Date: 20010402 Docket: A-599-99 BETWEEN: JIANZHONG MAI Appellant - and - THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT