Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20210923


Docket: IMM-3119-20

Citation: 2021 FC 983

St. John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, September 23, 2021

PRESENT: The Honourable Madam Justice Heneghan

BETWEEN:

VANIA DEYANIRA MARTINEZ GARCIA

Applicant

and

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

AND IMMIGRATION

Respondent

JUDGMENT AND REASONS

[1] Ms. Vania Deyanira Martinez Garcia (the “Applicant”) seeks judicial review of the decision of an Officer (the “Officer”) , refusing her application for permanent residence from within Canada on Humanitarian and Compassionate (“H and C”) grounds, pursuant to section 25 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S. C. 2001, c. 27 (the “Act”).

[2] The Applicant is a citizen of Mexico. She is the mother of a Canadian-born child. She argues that the Officer unreasonably assessed her application and unreasonably addressed the best interests of her child.

[3] The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (the “Respondent”) submits that the officer committed no reviewable error.

[4] The decision is reviewable on the standard of reasonableness, pursuant to the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Vavilov (2019), 441 D.L.R. (4th) 1 (S.C.C).

[5] In considering reasonableness, the Court is to ask if the decision under review “bears the hallmarks of reasonableness – justification, transparency and intelligibility – and whether it is justified in relation to the relevant factual and legal constraints that bear on that decision”; see Vavilov, supra at paragraph 99.

[6] Upon considering the record, and the written and oral submissions of the parties, I am not persuaded that the Officer’s decision is unreasonable. In my opinion, the assessment of the evidence meets the applicable legal standard. The best interests of the Canadian-born child were reasonably assessed, considering the evidence that was before the Officer.

[7] I see no breach of procedural fairness resulting from the fact that the Officer did not solicit further submissions from the Applicant.

[8] In the result, the application for judicial review is dismissed, there is no question for certification arising.


JUDGMENT in IMM-3119-20

THIS COURT’S JUDGMENT is that the application for judicial review is dismissed, there is no question for certification arising.

“E. Heneghan”

Judge


FEDERAL COURT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD


DOCKET:

IMM-3119-20

 

STYLE OF CAUSE:

VANIA DEYANIRA MARTINEZ GARCIA v THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

 

PLACE OF HEARING:

HELD BY WAY OF VIDEOCONFERENCE BETWEEN TORONTO, ONTARIO AND ST. JOHN’S, NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR

 

DATE OF HEARING:

SEPTEMBER 22, 2021

JUDGMENT AND REASONS:

HENEGHAN J.

DATED:

sEPTEMBER 23, 2021

APPEARANCES:

Astrid Mrkich

For The applicant

Madeline Macdonald

For The respondent

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Mrkich Law

Toronto, Ontario

 

For The applicant

Attorney General of Canada

Toronto, Ontario

 

For The respondent

 

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.