Issue 54 Vol III, December 31, 2007

L A W  &  J U S T I C E

Rejection of Visa
Person Sponsoring can Challenge

AN order passed by the Federal Court of Canada, on an application of a sponsor instead of the visitor, seeking judicial review for rejection of a visitor’s visa to Canada for his close friend and relative, whose application was rejected by the Canadian Consulate at Chandigarh, opens new vistas. Senior advocate and analyst of public issues Joginder Singh Toor writes from Toronto that those whose applications have been rejected ignoring the material placed on record could exercise their rights better.

The short order reading thus “Upon application for Leave to Commence an application for judicial Reviews and upon reading the material filed, this court orders that: leave is granted and the application for Judicial Review is deemed to have been commenced” provides a remedy for sponsors to file an application for judicial review in Canada for visitor visa applications rejected.

The substantial question of law involved in the case before the Federal Court is whether an application for Judicial Review can be filed by the sponsor living in Canada or it should be filed by the person whose application has been rejected.

The applicant who sponsored his close relative for a visitor visa, stated that he has been deprived of companionship and opportunity to spend some time together, have a family reunion, enjoy some time together, to be with him at the organized function, join in the celebrations and have an opportunity to show to his friend/relative, the efforts and hard work the applicant has put in the last few years after immigration to Canada in building up of his career and a decent network, along with owning of his house. In addition, he has been deprived of an opportunity of psychological satisfaction, which would have been achieved by sharing of thoughts with his friend/relative during his brief presence in Canada.

The Deputy Attorney General of Canada objected to the application saying that the judicial review jurisdiction can be invoked only “by any person directly affected by the matter, in respect of which the relief is sought.” The relatives of the visitor who acts as a sponsor does not have any standing to bring an application for leave to judicial review under the Federal Courts Act of Canada.

The objection of the Deputy Attorney General, is apparently untenable in view of Balwant Naik’s case, in which it was held “Thus, even in the case of denial of visitor visa, it is by no means impossible that the complainants in Canada, who are seeking to be visited by relatives from abroad should not themselves be victims of discriminatory practices directed against such relatives” clearly shows that the sponsor is also an aggrieved person having been denied the company of his relative/friend.

The grant of leave to an applicant living in Canada to seek judicial review is a welcome decision which is likely to help a large number of people aggrieved of rejection of temporary visa applications for reasons not tenable in law. Particularly in view of the fact that persons whose visa application are rejected cannot successfully indulge in litigation in a foreign country.

[The author is a senior lawyer based at Chandigarh, jogindersingh_toor@yahoo.com]

BACK