Singh Sandhar v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2013 FC 662 : IAD Unreasonably Found an Arranged Marriage Non-Genuine Despite Evidence of Shared Background and Family Intentions

In Singh Sandhar v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2013 FC 662, the Federal Court allowed judicial review of an Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) decision finding that the Applicant’s marriage was not genuine and had been entered into primarily to obtain permanent residence in Canada. The Court found that the IAD improperly assessed the arranged marriage through assumptions inconsistent with the cultural context and failed to consider important evidence supporting the genuineness and compatibility of the relationship.

Key Principle

When assessing the genuineness of an arranged marriage under section 4(1) of the IRPR, decision-makers must consider the cultural context in which the marriage occurred and must avoid applying expectations associated with Western marriages. The analysis must consider the evidence as a whole, including the parties’ circumstances, cultural traditions, compatibility, and evidence of their continuing relationship. The Court will not permit an IAD to selectively rely on evidence supporting a negative conclusion while disregarding relevant, uncontradicted evidence pointing toward a genuine relationship.

Background

The Applicant, an Indian citizen, had previously been married and divorced after immigrating to Canada through his first wife. In 2010, his relative arranged a second marriage with Mrs. Sandhar, an Indian citizen eight years younger than the Applicant. The couple first met on January 26, 2011, became engaged the following day, and married on February 6, 2011, followed by a honeymoon. The Applicant remained in India until March 2011 and returned again from October to November 2011.

His sponsorship application for his wife was refused after the visa officer concluded that the marriage was not genuine and had primarily been entered into to acquire permanent residence. The IAD reached the same conclusion, relying on the speed of the engagement and wedding, concerns about the Applicant’s previous divorce, perceived incompatibilities, errors in honeymoon bills, conflicting evidence about birth control and having children, and limited evidence of the couple’s continuing relationship.

Court Findings

• Cultural Context Was Essential

The Court found that the IAD’s assessment of the arranged marriage failed to account adequately for the cultural context. The couple met only eleven days before their wedding, but this was not inherently suspicious given that the marriage had been arranged by their extended families. The IAD improperly treated the short period of courtship as evidence against genuineness.

• Relevant Evidence Was Ignored

The IAD found the couple incompatible but overlooked uncontradicted evidence that they shared the same religion and language, came from nearby villages, wanted a family, and were only eight years apart. The Court held that the IAD failed to consider all relevant evidence rather than focusing only on evidence supporting its negative conclusion.

• Judicial Review Required Deference, But Not Blind Deference

Although considerable deference was owed to the IAD’s factual findings concerning genuineness and credibility, the Court was required to intervene where significant errors affected the overall assessment. The IAD’s treatment of the arranged-marriage context and relevant evidence rendered its conclusion unreasonable.

Outcome

The Federal Court allowed the application for judicial review, quashed the IAD decision, and remitted the matter to a differently constituted IAD panel for redetermination. No question for certification was raised.

Case Citation:

Singh Sandhar v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2013 FC 662 (CanLII)