Date: 20010501
Docket: IMM-5497-00
Neutral Citation: 2001 FCT 413
BETWEEN:
WENG U LEONG
Applicant
AND:
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
[1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision of Frazer Mark, a visa officer at the Canadian Embassy in Macau (the visa officer), dated October 2, 2000, in which he refused the Applicant's application for permanent residence in Canada.
[2] The Applicant applied for permanent residence in Canada on February 10, 1997, under the "entrepreneur" category. In his application, he claimed that he was the managing director of the "Beautiful World Restaurant" in Macau. He wanted to come to Canada to own and operate a Chinese restaurant.
[3] He was interviewed on May 21, 1997. A site visit and background checks were then initiated with respect to the restaurant. According to the report subsequently made, the restaurant staff, office staff and maitre d' confirmed not knowing the applicant. His name did not even appear on the business registration of the restaurant as an owner.
[4] By the time the checks were completed, the file had been reassigned to the visa officer. On January 12, 2000, a letter advising the applicant of concerns with respect to the ownership and management of the restaurant. The Applicant was invited to attend a second interview on October 2, 2000.
[5] At the interview, the visa office took issue with the credibility of the Applicant's explanations. Having reviewed the facts, the visa officer determined that the Applicant did not meet the definition of "entrepreneur" and he was refused.
[6] The Applicant submits that the visa officer failed to place adequate weight on the accountant's evidence. As well he failed to consider his experience as manager of a Chinese restaurant.
[7] The Applicant's only evidence that he holds a 50% ownership interest in the restaurant consists of a five-paragraph partnership agreement and a letter from an accountant.
[8] On the other hand, the visa officer possessed information that indicated that the Applicant's name did not appear as an owner on the business registration of the restaurant. As well, an on site visit was conducted at the Restaurant, neither the staff of the restaurant, the maitre d', nor the office staff knew the Applicant. The visa officer wrote the following in his CAIPS notes:
"I explained that we had checked his business in Macau and learned that he does not appear to be connected in any way to the restaurant he is supposed to partly own. I asked for an explanation. He provided a letter dated 30 September 2000 in Macau from Chan Pak Cheong his accountant attesting to the fact that he is in fact half owner of the restaurant and that both he and the other partner, Cheng Peng Lim, are responsible for the operations and administration of the restaurant. I noted that this was the opinion of Mr. Chan and as such does not constitute any weight of proof of the fact. I asked for further explanation as to why he is not registered as a partner of the company. Mr. Leong claimed that it took a lot of time to register a company with two partners so, as the two trusted each other, they decided to register in only one name. I asked why nobody at the restaurant knew him and he said that he spend a lot of time in China trying to find tourists to visit his restaurant. I noted that his passport records only one trip to Moscow and none for China. He claims that he uses a special Macau permit when he goes to China. He did not bring the permit on this trip so could not show it to me. He said that since he is often in China the regular staff do not recognize him. He also noted that they have a very high staff turnover and many of the staff are new and would not normally recognize him anyway.
I told him that his explanations were not credible. They, in fact, stretch credibility to the extreme."
[9] The documentary evidence, the visa officer added was self-serving. As can clearly be seen from the above notes, the credibility finding made by the visa officer is entirely reasonable and based on the evidence.
[10] According to subsection 2(1) of the Immigration Regulations:
| "entrepreneur" means an immigrant (a) who intends and has the ability to establish, purchase or make a substantial investment in a business or commercial venture in Canada that will make a significant contribution to the economy and whereby employment opportunities will be created or continued in Canada for one or more Canadian citizens or permanent residents, other than the entrepreneur and his dependants and (b) who intends and has the ability to provide active and on going participation in the management of the business or commercial venture |
"Entrepreneur" désigne un immigrant (a) qui a l'intention et qui est en mesure d'établir ou d'acheter au Canada une entreprise ou un commerce, ou d'y investir une somme importante, de façon à contribuer de manière significative à la vie économique et à permettre à au moins un citoyen canadien ou résident permanent, à part l'entrepreneur et les personnes à sa charge, d'obtenir ou de conserver un emploi, et (b) qui a l'intention et est en mesure de participer activement et régulièrement à la gestion de cette entreprise ou de ce commerce |
|
[11] In his notes, the visa officer wrote:
"The applicant displayed a profound lack of knowledge of Canada and Radium in particular. If he does have any understanding of normal managerial or business practices he has kept such knowledge well hidden. Despite the fact that he has been planning to start a new business in Canada, he seems to display very little in the way of ambition or motivation regarding his new home and business.
[...]
My greatest concerns lie with the applicant s abilities as a businessman. His management skills are almost non existent. At no time did he mention the hiring, firing or management of staff. This would be fundamental to running a restaurant in Canada. Mr. Leong, in fact, is so removed from this aspect of management that he would have us believe he is a full time manager and owner of an establishment in which none of the employees is even aware of his existence. I cannot in good conscience conclude that Mr. Leong has any managerial or entrepreneurial skills required for his category."
[12] This application is completely without merit. Accordingly, it is dismissed.
JUDGE
OTTAWA, Ontario
May 1st, 2001