Date: 19990803
Docket: IMM-6658-98
BETWEEN:
STEVEN WILDS
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
(Delivered orally from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario on
Tuesday, August 3, 1999)
LINDEN J.
| [1] The Canadian High Commission in the United Kingdom denied the application of the applicant, a U.K. Citizen, for permanent residence in Canada. This denial is being challenged by way of judicial review. |
| [2] The Visa Officer summarized the financial and other data which were given to the High Commission in her notes, and decided to reject the application. In her letter, dated November 24, 1998, she wrote thatI have also assessed your application against the criteria for entrepreneurs. Assessed in this occupation, you do not possess the funds to make a substantial investment in a business. In addition, based on your current business forecasts, I am not satisfied that your business can support yourself and create employment opportunities for at least one or more Canadian citizens. |
You therefore come within the inadmissible class of persons described in paragraph 19(2)(d) of the Immigration Act and your application has been refused. ...1
| [3] The relevant statutory provision, section 2(1) of the Immigration Regulations, 19782, is as follows:"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 dependents, and |
(b) who intends and has the ability to provide active and on-going participation in the management of the business or commercial venture; ...
| [4] While someone else may have come to a different conclusion, I can see no basis for interfering with this decision. The Visa Officer did not base the exercise of her discretion on any extraneous or irrelevant considerations, nor did she make any error of law. Her notes indicate that, on her assessment of the evidence, she did not accept as meeting the definition of entrepreneur the rosy forecasts made by the applicant based on his existing track record and the amount of money which he proposed to invest in the enterprise. It was within her authority to come to that conclusion.3 |
| [5] There is, I am told, nothing to prevent the applicant from applying again tomorrow in the hope of presenting better evidence and convincing another Visa Officer that he now meets the definition of "entrepreneur". |
| [6] The application will therefore be dismissed. |
"A.M. Linden"
JUDGE
TORONTO, ONTARIO
August 3, 1999
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
| COURT NO: IMM-6658-98 |
| STYLE OF CAUSE: STEVEN WILDS |
| - and - |
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
| DATE OF HEARING: TUESDAY, AUGUST 3, 1999 |
| PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO |
| REASONS FOR ORDER BY: LINDEN J. |
DATED: TUESDAY, AUGUST 3, 1999
APPEARANCES: Mr. Robert Young
For the Applicant
Ms. Susan Nucci
For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Robert W. Young
Barrister & Solicitor
19 Augusta Street
Hamilton, Ontario
L8N 1P6
| For the Applicant |
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date:19990803
Docket: IMM-6658-98
Between:
| STEVEN WILDS |
Applicant
- and -
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
__________________
1 High Commission Record at pages 6 - 7.
2 Immigration Regulations, 1978, SOR 78-172
3 See To v. M.C.I. [1996] F.C.J. No. 696 (C.A.) at para. 3 (QL), citing Maple Lodge Farms Limited v. Government of Canada et al. [1982] 2 S.C.R. 2 at pages 7 - 8.