Singh v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2016 FC 904 : Self-Employed PR Refusal Upheld Because Applicant Could Not Demonstrate Knowledge or Ability to Carry Out His Proposed Farm Business

Ø  Introduction

The Federal Court reviewed the refusal of a permanent residence application under the Self-Employed Persons Class.

The applicant had extensive farming experience in India and intended to establish a blueberry farm in British Columbia. The Court upheld the refusal because the officer reasonably found that he lacked sufficient knowledge of Canadian farming practices and could not explain or demonstrate the viability of his proposed business.

Ø  Key Principle

For the Self-Employed Persons Class, an applicant must demonstrate both the intention and ability to become self-employed in Canada and make a significant contribution to specified economic activities.

Previous experience alone is not sufficient. An officer may examine an applicant’s business plan, knowledge of the proposed Canadian business environment, research, finances, and ability to carry out the proposed venture.

Ø  Background

The applicant was a 45-year-old farmer from India who had spent decades cultivating vegetables, wheat, and dairy animals on a 30-acre farm.

He applied under the Self-Employed Persons Class with the intention of establishing a blueberry farm in British Columbia. He argued that he had extensive farming experience, substantial assets, and had hired an agricultural expert to assist with the proposed venture.

During his interview, however, the officer found that he knew little about Canadian farming practices, had conducted limited research into the proposed farm, could not adequately explain his business plan, and had limited knowledge about his intended location.

The officer therefore concluded that the applicant had not demonstrated the intention and ability to purchase and manage a farm in Canada.

Ø  Court Findings

The Federal Court found that the officer’s decision was reasonable.

The Court emphasized that the applicant’s previous farming experience in India did not automatically establish his ability to operate the proposed Canadian farming business. The officer was entitled to question his knowledge of farming conditions in British Columbia and his understanding of the business he proposed to establish.

The Court found that the officer reasonably considered the applicant’s limited knowledge of the proposed location, the vagueness of his business plan, his lack of relevant Canadian farming research, and his inability to adequately explain the strategies contained in his plan.

The Court also rejected the argument that the applicant’s inability to make an exploratory visit to Canada made the officer’s concerns unreasonable. An exploratory visit was not mandatory, but the applicant still had to demonstrate sufficient knowledge and preparation through other means.

The Court further found that his claimed net worth did not resolve the concerns because much of the value was in agricultural property in India, while the proposed Canadian farm purchase involved more than simply the stated down payment.

The Court also rejected the allegation of bias. A high refusal rate, without reliable evidence establishing its source or context, was insufficient to demonstrate actual or apprehended bias.

Ø  Outcome

The Federal Court dismissed the application for judicial review and upheld the refusal under the Self-Employed Persons Class.

Case Citation:

Singh v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2016 FC 904 CanLII