Our Recent Immigration Success Stories

Medical Inadmissibility Successfully Challenged despite Prognosis for Dialysis

We assisted a family last year on a medical admissibility matter. IRCC had identified their concerns in a Procedural Fairness Letter that the treatment the applicant was anticipated to require would place an excessive demand on Canada’s free health resources. In this particular case, the individual’s circumstances did in fact involve a long-term prognosis for renal replacement therapy (dialysis), determined to be inevitable in the coming years. As such, we got to work on preparing and presenting a reasonable and credible plan for care in Canada, demonstrating the family’s intent and ability to follow the plan, relying on the leading case we had worked on many years ago, Hilewitz, which determined what matters is not whether the individual will actually use the services, but, rather, whether the medical condition makes it likely he will require or use them. The plan considered the applicant’s medical as well as non-medical factors, identified and priced out the health services that would be used in the province of settlement, and the choice for conservative management for palliative care. The response to the Procedural Fairness Letter also included detailed H&C considerations.

We were extremely pleased when the applicant and his family recently learned that he was determined to be medically admissible – another success!

Judicial Review Allowed

Our client retained us following the refusal of her study permit application. The Decision was unreasonable and as such, we challenged the decision to the Federal Court of Canada. Following the submission of written pleadings by both parties, Leave was granted and the matter proceeded to a Judicial Review hearing.  

At the hearing, we presented compelling arguments and shortly after, the Application for Judicial Review was allowed. The Judge set aside the refusal and now, our client’s application for a study permit will be remitted back to another Officer for redetermination where she will be allowed to provide additional evidence and legal submissions. We are very pleased we could achieve such a wonderful result for our client and wish her all the best with her goal of studying in Canada.  

Refused PRRA Successfully Challenged at the Federal Court of Canada

Our client retained us following the refusal of his Pre-Removal Risk Assessment. We challenged the decision at the Federal Court of Canada, where Leave was granted. After carefully examining the Certified Tribunal Record, i.e. all the information the Officer relied on for their decision, we noticed the complete application was missing. We received a letter from the Department of Justice on behalf of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) offering a settlement to our client. Our client’s application for a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment was remitted back to another Officer for redetermination, where he will be allowed to provide additional evidence and legal submissions. We are thrilled that we were able to achieve such a result for our client!

This Week’s Success Story: Humanitarian and Compassionate Arguments Overcomes Challenging Inadmissibility and Leads to Successful PR!

A young family entered Canada nearly 5 years ago and made a refugee claim fleeing their country of nationality seeking refuge from threats and risks born from a secret society/cult. Despite the continuing dangers, their refugee claim was rejected. Seeking to protect themselves and primarily their young child, they appealed the decision to the Refugee Appeal Division, which was still unsuccessful, so then turned to the Federal Court, which application was also dismissed. Desperate, they applied for permanent residence under an H&C application. The families’ circumstances were examined, and they received an approval in principle – first stage approval, an exemption. However, then, they faced a finding of inadmissibility for medical inadmissibility.

In the time they were in Canada they had another child whose circumstances needed to be considered. We worked with the family and the medical professionals involved in the family member’s care, determining that the anticipated costs were in fact over the 5-year threshold as suggested, although advocated that the overage was not excessive providing proof, and also argued that when also considering the family’s collective circumstances, if needed, any further exemption should be granted. We got to work on presenting both a plan for continued care in Canada and the negative effects that would befall the entire family, which included two young children if the application was refused for medical inadmissibility. When Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) examined both their medical and non-medical factors, their application was finally approved, allowing the family to remain together, safe in Canada.