<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>breach of procedural fairness | Bellissimo Law Group</title>
	<atom:link href="https://www.bellissimolawgroup.com/tag/breach-of-procedural-fairness/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://www.bellissimolawgroup.com</link>
	<description>Toronto Immigration Lawyers Canada</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Dec 2024 17:51:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-CA</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>Self-represented litigants owed the opportunity to fully present their views and evidence before the Immigration Appeal Division</title>
		<link>https://www.bellissimolawgroup.com/self-represented-litigants-owed-the-opportunity-to-fully-present-their-views-and-evidence-before-the-immigration-appeal-division/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Legal Team]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Mar 2018 19:08:26 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cdnimm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Immigration Appeal Division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Humanitarian and Compassionate Grounds]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Citizenship and Immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[judicial review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[iad]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[procedural fairness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breach of procedural fairness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[legal aid]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.bellissimolawgroup.com/?p=29520</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>The Federal Court has recently affirmed that the right to a fair hearing places an ongoing obligation on the decision-maker, throughout legal proceedings, to assess whether a self-represented litigant is truly ready...</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://www.bellissimolawgroup.com/self-represented-litigants-owed-the-opportunity-to-fully-present-their-views-and-evidence-before-the-immigration-appeal-division/">Self-represented litigants owed the opportunity to fully present their views and evidence before the Immigration Appeal Division</a> first appeared on <a href="https://www.bellissimolawgroup.com">Bellissimo Law Group</a>.</p>]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Federal Court has recently affirmed that the right to a fair hearing places an ongoing obligation on the decision-maker, throughout legal proceedings, to assess whether a self-represented litigant is truly ready to proceed on their own, even where an Applicant indicates they wish to do so at the outset of a hearing.</p>
<p>In Clarke v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2018 FC 267, the applicant sought judicial review of a decision by the Immigration Appeal Division refusing to allow her residency obligation appeal on humanitarian and compassionate (H&amp;C) grounds. The Applicant is a 34-year-old who is literate and whose first language is English.</p>
<p>The Court acknowledged that, at the outset of the hearing, the IAD member had asked the Applicant if she was prepared to proceed without legal representation, to which she responded in the positive. The IAD member also explained to the applicant how the hearing would proceed and the basic legal framework and analysis when considering H&amp;C factors in a residency obligation appeal.</p>
<p>However, the Court found that, once it became apparent to the IAD member, as a result of certain comments made by the applicant throughout the hearing, that the applicant did not fully appreciate or understand the nature of the legal proceedings, the IAD member’s failure to provide the applicant with another opportunity to retain legal counsel, to advise her of the availability of legal aid, or to advise her that she could still submit additional material once the hearing had ended amounted to a breach of procedural fairness.</p>
<p>While the content of the duty to ensure a fair hearing remains context-dependant and to be determined on a case-by-case basis, this decision signals that there remains an ongoing procedural fairness obligation on the part of decision-makers, throughout a legal proceeding and regardless of whether or not a self-represented litigant declines legal representation at the outset,&nbsp; to be mindful of whether the applicant is truly understanding or appreciating the legal proceedings at hand and to provide them with the opportunity to present their views and evidence fully.</p><p>The post <a href="https://www.bellissimolawgroup.com/self-represented-litigants-owed-the-opportunity-to-fully-present-their-views-and-evidence-before-the-immigration-appeal-division/">Self-represented litigants owed the opportunity to fully present their views and evidence before the Immigration Appeal Division</a> first appeared on <a href="https://www.bellissimolawgroup.com">Bellissimo Law Group</a>.</p>]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>This Week&#8217;s Success Story: Refused Live-In Caregiver Permanent Residency Application Successfully Challenged in Federal Court!</title>
		<link>https://www.bellissimolawgroup.com/refused-live-in-caregiver-permanent-residency-application-successfully-challenged-in-federal-court/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Legal Team]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Oct 2016 15:15:14 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BLGPC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cdnimm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Federal Court]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Success Story]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breach of procedural fairness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[refused live-in caregiver permanent residency application]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[successfully challenged]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.bellissimolawgroup.com/?p=26896</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[<p>On behalf of the Applicant we argued that she was unrepresented throughout the application process and Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) conceded in the file notes that inconsistent and unclear requests were...</p>
<p>The post <a href="https://www.bellissimolawgroup.com/refused-live-in-caregiver-permanent-residency-application-successfully-challenged-in-federal-court/">This Week’s Success Story: Refused Live-In Caregiver Permanent Residency Application Successfully Challenged in Federal Court!</a> first appeared on <a href="https://www.bellissimolawgroup.com">Bellissimo Law Group</a>.</p>]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>On behalf of the Applicant we argued that she was unrepresented throughout the application process and Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) conceded in the file notes that inconsistent and unclear requests were made of the Applicant with respect to additional information regarding her husband, one of her overseas dependent.  Strikingly though, despite not explaining to the Applicant why the information she provided was insufficient, what steps she had to follow and the consequences of a refusal for non compliance, the Respondent summarily refused the application and we argued this was a breach of procedural fairness.  The application included the Applicants two children and had taken years to process.  She endured a six year separation from her children while she pursued Canadian status. We also submitted to the Court that live- in caregiver (LIC) applicants are often vulnerable, have little means and have made an important contribution through their work and that the goal of the LIC program is to facilitate the attainment of permanent residence status.</p>
<p>The Federal Court agreed that the goal of the LIC program is to facilitate the attainment of permanent residence status and recognized the valuable services LICs provide.  In finding that the Applicant’s procedural rights were breached the matter was sent back to be re-determined.  We are delighted by the outcome and hope to see the Applicant and her family reunited soon.</p><p>The post <a href="https://www.bellissimolawgroup.com/refused-live-in-caregiver-permanent-residency-application-successfully-challenged-in-federal-court/">This Week’s Success Story: Refused Live-In Caregiver Permanent Residency Application Successfully Challenged in Federal Court!</a> first appeared on <a href="https://www.bellissimolawgroup.com">Bellissimo Law Group</a>.</p>]]></content:encoded>
					
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
