Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Federal Court held that a TRV refusal was reasonable under Vavilov, finding the applicants had not credibly explained the trip purpose or large bank deposits.
The Federal Court granted judicial review of a TRV refusal, finding the officer’s reasons did not adequately justify the assessment of finances, ties to Iran, and travel history.
The Federal Court dismissed a judicial review of a visitor visa refusal, holding the officer reasonably found insufficient financial establishment and no procedural unfairness.
The Federal Court granted judicial review of a temporary resident visa refusal, finding the officer’s reasons unreasonable on family ties, finances, and travel history.
The Federal Court allowed judicial review of a Super Visa refusal, finding the officer ignored key positive evidence and relied on unexplained factors.
The Federal Court granted judicial review of a study-permit/temporary-resident-visa refusal, finding the officer’s reasons lacked justification and improperly treated lack of travel history as negative.
Federal Court judicial review of a RAD credibility decision in a refugee protection claim. The Court found no reviewable error and dismissed the application.
Federal Court allowed judicial review of a study permit refusal, finding no procedural unfairness but holding the officer’s reasons on English ability were unreasonable.
The Tribunal confirmed the RPD's decision because material omissions in the Principal Appellant's BOC and unexplained inconsistencies in the Appellants' travel history rationally rebutted the presumption of truth; combined with the Principal Appellant's insufficient demonstrated knowledge of Falun Gong, these grounds justified adverse credibility findings and denial of refugee protection under s.111(1)(a) IRPA.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review, upholding a misrepresentation finding under s 40 of IRPA based on undisclosed travel history and rejecting the innocent error argument.
Explore more
