Canadian Supreme Court process for making a reasonable decision on immigration applications
A Canadian citizen at birth had his Canadian citizenship certification cancelled because it was discovered that his parents were Russian intelligencers.
The decision by the Canadian Registrar of Citizenship was appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada where the standard of review for executive opinions was bandied. In particular, the case helps the government of Canada set out parameters, programs and procedures for Immigration, Deportees and Citizenship Canada IRCC officers to use when making an executive decision to insure the most reasonable and fair decision gets made.
Alexander Vavilov was born in Toronto to parents who, it latterly was revealed, were under assumed names and Russian agents working for the Russian foreign intelligence service. Alexander didn't know any of this. He believed that he was a Canadian citizen by birth and had a Canadian passport.
In 2010, Alexanders parents were arrested in the United States and charged with spying. They maintain shamefaced and were transferred to Russia. When it was discovered who his parents really were, the Canadian Registrar of Citizenship cancelled Vavilov’s citizenship instrument. Under the Citizenship Act, children of a “ politic or consular officer or other representative or hand in Canada of a foreign government ” are barred from entering citizenship, which is an exception from the general rule that individualities born in Canada gain Canadian citizenship by birth.
The case went up to the Supreme Court of Canada, where the case was decided in favour of Vavilov, stating that the Registrar’s decision was unreasonable, and Vavilov was suitable to recapture Canadian citizenship. In doing so, the court established a new standard of review for Canadian executive law.
opinions made my immigration, citizenship, passport and border services officers are executive opinions, and are therefore subject to judicial review. The standard of review for these types of opinions refers to the quantum of compliance that a court of law should demonstrate toward a decision. The Vavilov case established that a presumption of “ reasonableness ” is the standard of review of all executive opinions. A court must consider the outgrowth of a decision and the defense for the decision.
A decision will be reasonable when the court is suitable to follow the decision maker’s logic and sense in coming to their conclusion. A decision made must be grounded on coherent logic and justified in agreement with the data and the legal environment. An officer must follow certain way to insure they're making reasonable opinions when it comes to any immigration operation.