Kapoor et al v. M.C.I. IMM-12951-25
Our client and her husband had submitted an Expression of Interest to sponsor her mother as a permanent resident of Canada via the Parent Grandparent program (PGP). They received an Invitation to Apply for her mother’s permanent residence.
The couple retained an immigration consultant for the preparation and submission of their PGP permanent resident application.
Unbeknownst to them, their consultant made a number of errors which led to an immigration officer refusing their PGP permanent resident application.
They then retained Eastman Law Office to challenge the officer’s refusal by filing an application for leave and judicial review in the Federal Court.
Our clients found out after the refusal that their previous consultant had failed to tell them that Immigration Canada had sent them a Procedural Fairness Letter (PFL) in relation to their PGP application before the refusal and failed to submit critical information to the immigration officer as requested by him in the PFL.
Our law office assessed the facts and evidence and concluded that our clients’ former immigration consultant was negligent and incompetent to the point that her conduct had affected the fairness of the PGP application process: our client had not been heard by the immigration officer.
We made these arguments in our written argument to the Federal Court and that, but for the Applicants’ consultant negligence, the Applicants’ PGP application would not have been refused.
Those arguments carried the day and without having to argue the matter at a hearing before a judge in Federal Court, the Respondent (Immigration Canada) approached our client seeking to settle the matter outside of court, which my clients accepted.
After discontinuing our clients’ application for leave and judicial review in the Federal Court, Immigration Canada, as promised in the settlement agreement, reopened our clients’ PGP application and resumed processing it.
