It is well established that a visa officer has no legal obligation to seek out explanations or more ample information to assuage concerns relating to a visa application by way of a โProcedural Fairness Letterโ or any other means. Imposing such an obligation on a visa officer would amount to giving advance notice of a negative decision, which has been rejected by Canadian Courts on many occasions.
The standard of review applicable to a review of a visa officerโs decision to refuse a study permit or temporary residence application is that of reasonableness. A reasonable decision must be based on an internally coherent and rational chain of analysis and be justified in relation to the facts and law that constrain the decision maker. It must also bear the hallmarks of reasonableness โ justification, transparency and intelligibility.
Canadian Courtโs review of procedural fairness issues involves no deference to the decision maker. The question is whether the procedure was fair having regard to all of the circumstances, focusing on the nature of the substantive rights involved and the consequences for the individual affected.
๐๐ค๐ณ๐ข๐ฏ ๐ท. ๐๐ข๐ฏ๐ข๐ฅ๐ข (๐๐ช๐ต๐ช๐ป๐ฆ๐ฏ๐ด๐ฉ๐ช๐ฑ ๐ข๐ฏ๐ฅ ๐๐ฎ๐ฎ๐ช๐จ๐ณ๐ข๐ต๐ช๐ฐ๐ฏ) 2022 ๐๐ 175
The applicant bears the onus of submitting to the officer all information relevant to eligibility with their application. It is in cases where an officer considers issues or facts extraneous to the application requirements that a duty arises to advise the applicant of the issue or concern.
Visa officers are generally not required to provide applicants with opportunities to clarify or further explain their applications. The onus remains on applicants to provide all the necessary information to support their application, not on the Officer to seek it out.
In order for the Court to intervene, the Court must find an error in the decision that is sufficiently central or significant to render the decision unreasonable.
