Wang v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)
- Citation
- 2020 FC 1129
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Court
- Federal Court
- Decision
- 7 December 2020
- Posture
- Judicial Review (immigration) / Decision Application Dismissed
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Federal Court
- Decision
- 7 December 2020
- Posture
- Judicial Review (immigration) / Decision Application Dismissed
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The application was dismissed because the applicant withdrew the affidavit that contained the material upon which the judicial review relied, leaving no evidence of any reviewable error to justify court intervention.
Court disposition
Application for judicial review dismissed.
Orders
- The application for judicial review is dismissed.
- There is no question for certification arising.
02
Material facts
Parties
Feng Wang
Applicant Counsel: Shepherd Moss; Chand and CompanyMinister of Citizenship and Immigration
Respondent Counsel: Robert L. Gibson; Attorney General of Canada03
Procedural history
Posture
Judicial Review (immigration) / Decision Application Dismissed
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the Immigration Officer erred in refusing the TRP extension
- 02
Whether there was any evidence of a reviewable error to engage judicial review
- 03
Whether the withdrawn affidavit could support the judicial review
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Applicant sought judicial review of the refusal to extend a Temporary Resident Permit and relied on an affidavit of an immigration consultant which was later withdrawn; counsel made no further submissions and stated he lacked instructions from the client.
- Respondent
- Respondent submitted there was no evidence of any reviewable error and that the Court should dismiss the application.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Common law judicial review principles
Judicial review requires cogent evidence of a reviewable error before the court will intervene.
- 02
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27, s. 24(1)
Authority to issue Temporary Resident Permits under subsection 24(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The application was dismissed because the applicant withdrew the affidavit that contained the material upon which the judicial review relied, leaving no evidence of any reviewable error to justify court intervention.
Obiter and limits
- There is no question for certification arising.
Court disposition
Application for judicial review dismissed.
- The application for judicial review is dismissed.
- There is no question for certification arising.
Source and reliance status
Federal Court · 7 December 2020
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Federal Court
Judgment· 7 December 2020
Wang v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2020-12-07 Neutral citation 2020 FC 1129 File numbers IMM-6342-19 Decision Content Date: 20201207 Docket: IMM-6342-19 Citation: 2020 FC 1129 Vancouver, British Columbia, December 7, 2020 PRESENT: The Honourable Madam Justice Heneghan BETWEEN:
FENG WANG Applicant and
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION Respondent
JUDGMENT AND REASONS [1] Mr. Feng Wang (the “Applicant”) seeks judicial review of the decision of an Immigration Officer (the “Officer”) refusing his application for an extension of his Temporary Resident Permit (“the TRP”) that was issued pursuant to subsection 24(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c.27 (the “Act”). [2] The application for the TRP contained in the Certified Tribunal Record (“CTR”) is not the same as the TRP extension application attached to the affidavit of Soyeum Park, Immigration Consultant, which affidavit was filed as part of the Applicant’s Application Record. [3] At the hearing of the application for judicial review, Counsel for the Applicant advised that he was withdrawing this affidavit because it is not correct. [4] Counsel for the Applicant also advised the Court that he had been unable to get instructions from his client so was not in a position where he could withdraw or discontinue the application for judicial review. [5] Counsel for the Applicant further advised that he had no further submissions. [6] Counsel for the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (the “Respondent”) was heard. [7] In reply to a question from the Court, Counsel for the Applicant advised that he was acting in his capacity as an officer of the Court in withdrawing the affidavit that contained erroneous information. [8] In the circumstances, there is no evidence of a reviewable error to justify the intervention of the Court and the application for judicial review is dismissed, there is no question for certification arising. JUDGMENT in IMM-6342-19 THIS COURT’S JUDGMENT is that the application for judicial review is dismissed; there is no question for certification arising. “E. Heneghan” Judge
FEDERAL COURT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: IMM-6342-19 STYLE OF CAUSE: FENG WANG v. MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION HEARING HELD BY VIDEOCONFERENCE ON DECEMBER 7, 2020 FROM VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA (COURT) (PARTIES) JUDGMENT AND REASONS: HENEGHAN J. DATED: December 7, 2020 APPEARANCES: Shepherd Moss For The applicant Robert L. Gibson For The respondent SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Chand and Company Law Corporation Vancouver, British Columbia For The applicant Attorney General of Canada Vancouver, British Columbia For The respondent
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.