Ebiega v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2021 FC 1322 : Decision Set Aside After Minister Acknowledged Procedural Fairness Breach in TRV Refusal

The Federal Court considered the Minister’s motion for judgment in Patrick Abah Ebiega’s judicial review of a Temporary Resident Visa refusal. The Minister acknowledged that the visa officer’s September 29, 2020 decision had been made in breach of procedural fairness and offered to have the refusal set aside and the application redetermined by a different officer. The applicant sought broader settlement terms, including solicitor-and-client costs. The Court granted the Minister’s motion, set aside the TRV refusal, and declined to award costs.

Key Principle

The Federal Court confirmed that where the respondent acknowledges a reviewable error and offers the same substantive relief that an applicant could obtain after a successful judicial review hearing, the Court may enter judgment without requiring a full hearing. Costs in immigration judicial review matters remain exceptional and require “special reasons” under Rule 22 of the Federal Courts Citizenship, Immigration and Refugee Protection Rules.

Background

The applicant challenged a September 29, 2020 decision refusing his application for a TRV to visit Canada. He filed his application for leave and judicial review on December 1, 2020.

In April 2021, the Minister offered to settle this proceeding and a related judicial review. The proposed settlement required both applications to be discontinued, the underlying decisions to be set aside, and the matters to be returned to different officers for redetermination. The applicant would also be permitted to submit updated documentation, with no costs awarded.

The applicant did not accept those terms. In responding to the Minister’s later motion for judgment, he proposed different settlement terms and requested costs on a solicitor-and-client basis. The Minister maintained that the proposed judgment already provided the applicant with the full relief available through judicial review.

Court Findings

• Minister Conceded a Breach of Procedural Fairness

The Court accepted the Minister’s acknowledgment that the TRV refusal involved a reviewable procedural fairness error. Because the respondent accepted that the decision should be set aside, there was no need for the Court to conduct a full hearing to determine whether a reviewable error existed.

• Judgment Provided the Available Judicial Review Remedy

The Court found that entering judgment in the applicant’s favour gave him the best substantive result he could obtain after a successful hearing. The refusal would be quashed and the TRV application would be returned to a different officer for a fresh determination.

• No Special Reasons Justified an Award of Costs

The applicant sought solicitor-and-client costs, but the Court emphasized that Rule 22 generally prohibits costs in immigration leave and judicial review matters unless special reasons exist. The applicant had not originally sought costs in his judicial review application and did not establish circumstances sufficiently exceptional to justify an award. The Court therefore declined to order costs.

Outcome

The Federal Court granted the Minister’s motion for judgment, set aside the September 29, 2020 TRV refusal, and remitted the matter to a different officer for redetermination. The applicant received the substantive relief available through judicial review, but no costs were awarded.

Case Citation:

Ebiega v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2021 FC 1322 (CanLII)