Ajzachi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2022 FC 356 : Spousal Sponsorship Refusal Set Aside Where IAD Gave Ambiguous Genuineness Finding and Overlooked Relationship Evidence

The Federal Court reviewed Mohammad Ajzachi’s challenge to the IAD’s dismissal of his appeal from the refusal of his wife’s sponsored PR application. The IAD found the marriage “not genuine in some respects” and primarily entered into for immigration purposes. The Court found the decision unreasonable because the genuineness finding was unclear and important relationship evidence was overlooked.

Key Principle

A spousal sponsorship decision must clearly determine whether a marriage is genuine and whether it was entered into primarily for immigration purposes. Ambiguous findings do not satisfy justification, transparency, and intelligibility, and material evidence relevant to the spouses’ intentions at marriage must be meaningfully considered.

Background

The applicant, a long-time Canadian citizen, met his future wife in Cuba in February 2017 and married her in March 2018. He sponsored her in June 2018. The visa officer refused the application, citing a 42-year age difference and limited evidence of compatibility. The IAD dismissed the appeal, finding the relationship not genuine in some respects and immigration its primary purpose.

Court Findings

• Genuineness Finding Was Internally Ambiguous

The IAD was required to decide whether the marriage was genuine. Instead, it found that the relationship was “not genuine in some respects,” wording suggesting it was genuine in others. The Court held that this did not provide a sufficiently clear determination and failed the requirements of transparency and intelligibility.

• Poor Wording Was Not Merely Harmless

The Respondent conceded that the IAD had expressed itself badly but argued this was only a drafting problem. The Court disagreed because the same formulation appeared more than once in the reasons. Its repetition showed the problem was not simply an isolated verbal slip.

• Immigration-Purpose Finding Was Independently Relevant

The Court recognized that the ambiguous genuineness finding was not by itself determinative because the governing test is disjunctive. The IAD also found that the marriage was entered into primarily for immigration purposes, which could independently defeat the sponsorship if reasonably supported.

• Early Relationship Evidence Could Properly Be Considered

The applicant argued that the IAD focused too heavily on circumstances when the couple first met, including the relationship’s rapid development and their initial lack of a common language. The Court held it was open to the IAD to consider those facts as part of the relationship history.

• Pre-Marriage Visits Were Material

The spouses did not marry immediately after meeting. Thirteen months elapsed, and the applicant returned to Cuba at least three more times before travelling again to marry his wife. Those visits were directly relevant to whether the parties had developed a bona fide relationship and to their intentions at marriage.

• Failure to Engage With Repeated Visits Was Unreasonable

Although the IAD was presumed to have considered the whole record, the repeated trips before the wedding were central evidence pointing against the conclusion that the marriage was primarily immigration-driven. The IAD did not meaningfully address them. The Court inferred they had been overlooked, undermining the justification for the immigration-purpose finding.

Outcome

The Federal Court granted judicial review, set aside the IAD decision, and remitted the matter to a different panel for redetermination. No question of general importance was certified.

Case Citation:

Ajzachi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2022 FC 356 (CanLII)