The Federal Court of Canada in the case of Jafari v. Canada [2022 FC 1761] refused to interfere with the decision of IRCC denying Study Permit to a 7-year-old and visitor visa to her mother from Iran primarily on the grounds of Funds and future prospects. Without commenting on the facts, I am reiterating two paragraphs of the judgment which are self-explanatory: [1] This application for judicial review arises from the March 20, 2022 refusal (the “Decision”) of a visa officer (the “Officer”) to grant a study permit to a 7-year-old child, Lara Jafari (“Miss Jafari”). At the time of her application, Miss Jafari was attending grade 1 in Iran. She sought a study permit to attend grade 2 in Canada. At paragraph 5, page 154 of his memorandum to this Court, counsel for the Applicant, writes about, the “strong employment prospects in their [sic] home country upon return after the completion of their [sic] Program”. At paragraph 24, page 161 of that same memorandum, counsel writes about the Applicant’s “career path” and refers to non-existent parts of the Applicant’s affidavit. How Applicant’s counsel can write about the career path of a 7-year-old girl and her strong employment prospects upon completion of her program, comes as somewhat of a surprise to me, given that this program consists of her primary level grade 2 education in Canada. Those observations by counsel, if nothing else, militate against Miss Jafari’s declared intent to return to Iran upon completion of her authorized stay (which was to be one year to study grade 2 in Canada). [18] The Applicants also contend that the Officer’s decision is unreasonable in that he or she failed to consider the financial means and other assets available for Miss Jafari’s studies. I disagree. The Respondent submitted that this course of study, for only one year, would consume over one third of the combined savings of Miss Jafari’s parents. The Respondent is generous when he refers to “over one third”; as I already noted, the amount is actually closer to one-half of their current savings. The Officer’s notes reveal that he or she “[w]eighed the factors in this application” including the documentation on file in support of the parent’s level of economic establishment. That observation, combined with the Respondent’s remarks about the percentage of savings that would be expended for this one year of study, demonstrates that the Officer turned his mind to the topic of the financial feasibility of this program for a 7-year-old minor, studying at the grade 2 level in a foreign land, more than 10,000 kilometres from home. In the circumstances, given Miss Jafari’s age, the cost of travel to Iran for visits with her father, the cost of living in Canada and the future costs of her education, the conclusion passes the test of reasonableness. It is justified, transparent and intelligible. The court ultimately dismissed the case. #studyvisa #judicialreview #immigrationlawyer #canadianimmigration #cdnimm #ircc
