Date: 20010330
Docket: IMM-1289-00
Neutral Citation: 2001 FCT 333
BETWEEN:
ZUBAIR SHAMS
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
[1] This is an application for judicial review of the decision of Mr. Victor Majid (the visa officer) at the Canadian High Commission in Singapore, rendered on February 21, 2000, refusing the application of Mr. Zubair Shams (the applicant) for permanent residence in Canada.
[2] The applicant, a citizen of Bangladesh, applied as an independent applicant, and requested to be assessed as a financial officer, an administrative officer, and an economist.
[3] The visa officer did a formal assessment and point calculation only for the occupation of banking utility clerk. He made a preliminary determination but not a formal assessment in the occupations that the applicant listed as intended occupations.
[4] As stated in Essavea v. Canada, (1997), 37 Imm.L.R. 2d 91, the Uy v. Canada, (1991), 12 Imm.L.R. 2d 172, is a binding authority which requires that an assessment in accordance with the Immigration Act and Regulations must be made with respect to a proposed immigrant's claimed occupation. The term "assessment" means the process of applying to the prospective immigrant the factors listed on Column I of Schedule I of the Regulations. A cursory evaluation without regard to these factors is not an assessment.
[5] Further, in his letter dated February 21, 2000, the visa officer refused the applicant's application on the basis that the applicant had not performed a substantial portion of the duties required for an administrative officer as is set out in the CCDO and the NOC.
[6] However, the definition of the CCDO specifically states that an applicant meets the required duties of an administrative officer by "performing any combination of the following duties":
Administers office services, such as personnel, budget preparation and control, accommodation and facilities, housekeeping, records and special management studies, performing any combination of the following duties:
Studies management methods and analyzes operating practices to improve work flow, simplify administrative procedure and implement cost reductions, and makes recommendations to management. Prepares annual estimates of expenditures and maintains budgetary and inventory controls. Evaluates requests for or changes in accommodations and approves, proposes alternatives or reject requests. Locates accommodations, and studies real-estate data to compare rental expenditure with purchase cost. Inspects building and floor area to evaluate suitability considering such factors as location, floor area, parking facilities and future expansion. Negotiates lease or purchase. Develops and sketches office layout to reflect management requirements. Consults with architect, contractors and others on a continuing basis to ensure scheduled occupancy. Supervises and co-ordinates activities of workers engaged in clerical and maintenance duties. Interviews job applicants, conducts orientation of new employees and implements training programs. Reviews and answers correspondence. (My emphasis.)
[7] It is clear that the applicant need not perform all or a substantial portion of the duties in the CCDO description to qualify in the occupation of administrative officer. By requiring that the applicant perform a substantial number of the duties the visa officer has imported an additional requirement into the definition of the CCDO.
[8] These errors are sufficiently serious to allow the application for judicial review.
[9] The application for judicial review is granted, the visa officer's decision dated February 21, 2000 is set aside and the matter is returned for redetermination by a different visa officer.
(Sgd.) "Danièle Tremblay-Lamer"
Judge
VANCOUVER, BRITISH COLUMBIA
March 30, 2001.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: RAM-1289-00 STYLE OF CAUSE: Zubair Shams v. MCI
PLACE OF HEARING: Vancouver, BC DATE OF HEARING: March 29, 2001 REASONS FOR ORDER OF Tremblay-Lamer, J.
| DATED: March 29, 2001 |
|
| APPEARANCES: |
|
| Mr. P. Chapman |
FOR APPLICANT |
| Ms. K. Shane |
FOR RESPONDENT |
| SOLICITORS OF RECORD: |
|
| Chapman and Company |
FOR APPLICANT |
| Law Corporation |
|
| Vancouver, BC |
|
| Morris Rosenberg |
FOR RESPONDENT |
| Deputy Attorney General |
|
| of Canada |
|