Date: 19980514
Docket: IMM-2784-97
IMM-2785-97
BETWEEN:
ANPALEHAN RAJARATNAM
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
McGILLIS, J.
[1] Despite the able argument of counsel for the applicant, I have not been persuaded that the visa officer breached the duty of fairness by failing to provide sufficient notice of her concerns to the applicant or by failing to provide him with an opportunity to respond to those concerns.
[2] On May 8, 1997, an application for a returning resident permit was received in the applicant's name at the High Commission in New Delhi, India. The visa officer who reviewed the application noticed that the person in the three passport photographs submitted with the application did not appear to be the same person depicted in the photograph in the Sri Lankan passport or in the United States visa in that passport. Due to those and other discrepancies, she decided to interview the person who had submitted the application and who claimed to be the applicant.
[3] At the outset of the interview, the visa officer immediately noticed that the person in front of her did not resemble any of the photographs. She advised the person that he did not resemble any of the photographs that she had examined. The person responded that he had undergone "hair treatments but not a hair transplant." The visa officer advised the person that his explanation was unsatisfactory. He offered no further explanation. As a result, she concluded that the person was an impostor, and seized the Canadian Record of Landing. The application for a returning resident permit was refused. The person who appeared at the interview was given a standard form letter indicating that the returning resident permit had been refused.
[4] The visa officer's computer notes, which were made at the time, indicate as follows:
| Person presenting himself for interview is not\not the person whose picture is on the PPT... He claims he has had "hair treatments but not hair transplant". Refused: he is an impostor. |
[5] In his affidavit, the applicant testified that he attended at the interview, but denied that the visa officer advised him about any concerns. He further denied that he was provided with an opportunity to respond to any such concerns.
[6] I have carefully reviewed all of the evidence in the record. In my opinion, the evidence of the visa officer, as reflected in her computer notes, her affidavit and her cross-examination, is inherently consistent and credible, and indicates unequivocally that she advised the person who attended the interview that he did not resemble any of the photographs submitted to her. Furthermore, her computer notes, which were made at the time of the interview, contain the explanation advanced by the person in response to her concerns. In the circumstances, I specifically reject the evidence of the applicant in his affidavit that he, or the person who attended the interview, was denied an opportunity to respond to the visa officer's concerns.
[7] I am satisfied, on the basis of the evidence in the record, that the visa officer raised her concerns with the person at the interview and provided him with an opportunity to respond. I have therefore concluded that the visa officer did not breach the duty of fairness in the circumstances of the present case.
[8] The application for judicial review is dismissed. The case raises no serious question of general importance.
"D. McGillis"
Judge
Toronto, Ontario
May 14, 1998
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
COURT NO: IMM-2784-97
IMM-2785-97
| STYLE OF CAUSE: ANPALEHAN RAJARATNAM |
- and -
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
DATE OF HEARING: MAY 13, 1998
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: MCGILLIS, J.
DATED: MAY 14, 1998
APPEARANCES: Mr. Paul Vandervennen
For the Applicant
Mr. Stephen Gold
For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Vandervennen Lehrer
45 Saint Nicholas Street
Toronto, Ontario
M4Y 1W6
For the Applicant
George Thomson
Deputy Attorney General
of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date: 19980514
Docket: IMM-2784-97
IMM-2785-97
Between:
| ANPALEHAN RAJARATNAM |
Applicant
- and -
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER