Category: Standard of Review

The Court set aside a decision of a PRRA officer when the officer relied on a recently released report and failed to disclose it: [13] The Respondent is unable to explain the reason for the failure to notify the Applicant of the existence of the ECRI Report. While that Report may not be the only documentary evidence relied upon by the Officer, it is evident from the decision that it played a critical role in the decision. The administrative convenience or efficiency (a benefit to the public) in issuing the PRRA decision quickly does not justify withholding the existence of the Report issued 10 days before and then relying upon it in such large measure.

The issue of the exercise of discretion with respect to the residency requirement is not one which has received much attention. This indeed is the first case I am aware of where the court has done a detailed analysis of the factors. It is also noteworthy for its careful application of Khosa to the question of the standard of review. .

The Supreme Court held that there are only two standards of review--correctness and reasonableness.

The Supreme Court held that in cases involving judicial review of decisions of immigration officers the Court must determine whether the reasons for decision constitute on of the possible outcomes that could be reached based on the evidence before the tribunal