Disclaimer
The information provided on this website is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. While we strive to keep the information accurate and up to date, Canadian immigration laws and policies are subject to change without notice. No visitor to this site should act or refrain from acting based on the content herein without first seeking appropriate professional advice from a licensed immigration consultant or lawyer.
Using this website or reading its content does not create a consultant–client relationship with Arrowhood Immigration Services Inc. If you have specific questions about your immigration situation, please contact us directly for a personalized consultation.
Credibility at the Core
In the case of Abraham v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2023 FC 70, the Federal Court's decision emphasizes the critical role of credibility in refugee claims. The court upheld the rejection of a refugee claim based on inconsistencies and omissions in the applicants' testimonies. Learn the key takeaways from this case, and how refugee applicants can strengthen their claims.
Denied Sanctuary: One Man's Fight for Refugee Status While His Family Finds Safety
The path to refuge in Canada is rarely straightforward, and the recent Federal Court decision in Aslam v. Canada (Immigration, Refugee and Citizenship), 2025 FC 655, starkly illustrates this complexity. While his wife and children were granted the sanctuary they sought, Mr. Aslam's claim was denied based on the contentious concept of an Internal Flight Alternative (IFA). This case delves into the intricacies of IFA assessments, the stringent rules surrounding new evidence at the appeal stage, and the challenging reality faced by a self-represented litigant navigating Canada's refugee protection system. Join us as we explore the key takeaways from Aslam and what it means for individuals seeking safety and family unity in Canada.
Navigating the Narrow Path: Understanding Deferral of Removal in Canada - Insights from Nam v. Canada (2025 FC 720)
The core of the Court's decision to order a redetermination lay in the Officer's inadequate assessment of the applicant's mental health. The case emphasizes that when mental health is presented as a reason for deferral, the evidence must be comprehensive and directly link the act of removal to a significant deterioration of the individual's well-being, potentially leading to self-harm. Simply stating a diagnosis is insufficient. The evidence must articulate how removal, specifically, would have a severe negative impact beyond the typical stress associated with such proceedings.
Unseen Traps in Canadian Immigration: The Huang Case and Protecting Your Future
A seemingly minor association can derail your Canadian dream. The recent Federal Court decision in Huang v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 699 unveils the far-reaching implications of "membership" in organizations linked to criminal activity, even without a personal conviction. This eye-opening case underscores the absolute necessity of understanding these complex inadmissibility rules. For Arrowhead Immigration Services Inc., it reinforces our unwavering commitment to meticulous client guidance and proactive risk assessment, ensuring your journey to Canada is secure.
Pregnancy Pause: Procedural Fairness Prevails in Work Permit Refusal.
The Federal Court on May 6,2025 overturned the refusal of an open work permit for Munashe Sungai, whose application to join his spouse, a student in Canada, was denied based on a flawed assessment. The Visa Officer relied on outdated information from a student compliance portal indicating the spouse was no longer enrolled full-time, failing to consider her approved pregnancy leave. Justice Régimbald found this constituted a breach of procedural fairness, as the Officer did not give Mr. Sungai an opportunity to explain the discrepancy before making a decision based on inaccurate information. The Court emphasized that while the onus is on applicants to provide necessary information, officers have a duty to seek clarification when concerns arise about the accuracy of submitted details.
When "Settled" Works Against You: The Alabi Family and the May 6, 2025 Decision.
“For the reasons set out below, I find the Decision unreasonable and I grant the application." These powerful words from Madam Justice Go in the May 6, 2025 Federal Court decision concerning the [Alabi family] signal a significant moment in the consideration of H&C claims, particularly concerning the best interests of children and mental health.
The Importance of Perseverance, Proper Documentation, and Patience in Immigration Applications.
In D'Souza v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2025 FC 682, the Court reinforced the importance of perseverance and proper documentation in immigration applications.
The Steep Price of Overstaying: Lessons from Singh v. Canada
Singh v. Canada (2025 FC 705) highlights the harsh consequences of overstaying in Canada. Despite efforts to regain status, Mr. Singh was found inadmissible for non-compliance, and the Court upheld the decision—reminding all that legal status is non-negotiable in immigration matters.
Not the End of the Road: What Happens After a Refused Refugee Claim in Canada?
Getting a "no" on your refugee claim or permanent resident application in Canada can feel like a dead end. But don't lose hope! Canada has a few paths you might still be able to take. This simple guide will walk you through some of your options to stay safe in Canada, illustrated by a recent case highlighting the importance of proper assessment.
The Importance of Meeting Deadlines in Immigration Applications
A recent Federal Court case highlights the serious consequences of missing immigration deadlines. In Saffar v. Canada (2025 FC 645), one missed payment led to the refusal of four permanent residence applications. Learn why timing is everything — and how Arrowhood Immigration Services helps you stay on track.