GERASIMOS TSARAOSI Applicant v. THE MINISTER OF, 2017 FC 59

Date: 20170117 Docket: IMM-2893-16 Citation: 2017 FC 59 Toronto, Ontario, January 17, 2017 PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Shore BETWEEN: GERASIMOS TSARAOSI Applicant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent JUDGMENT AND REASONS I. Overview [ 1 ] During his studies in Canada, the Applicant was an honour student at George Brown College.

The same academic institution has now accepted his application for a resumption of post-secondary study. [ 2 ] It cannot be stated that his study plans do not encompass a logical trajectory for a study permit from the evidence before the Visa Officer, nor that it is insufficient. (Reference is made to Egheoma v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration , IMM-1005-16, October 20, 2016.) II. Decision [ 3 ] The Applicant applied for a study permit pursuant to subsection 11(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act , SC 2001, c 27.

The study permit was denied by the Visa Officer due to (1) overall unreasonableness of the Applicant’s plan of studies; (2) strong personal ties to Canada; and, (3) previous immigration history (2010-2014) when he was a student living in Canada with his parents, during which time the family had been refused refugee status. [ 4 ] During his studies in Canada, the Applicant was an honour student at George Brown College.

The same academic institution has now accepted his application for a resumption of post-secondary study. [ 5 ] The Applicant has provided evidence of the establishment of his parents in Greece; corroboration was submitted as to significant savings for the Applicant’s student stay in Canada. [ 6 ] The Applicant’s family resides in Greece and his ties therein remain strong.

Only former friends are living in Canada with no family ties to his person. [ 7 ] It cannot be stated that his study plans do not encompass a logical trajectory for a study permit from the evidence before the Visa Officer, nor that it is insufficient. [ 8 ] It is not understandably clear as to why the Visa Officer denied the study permit. Without more specific clarification, even be it significantly brief, the officer’s decision is not reasonable. [ 9 ] Therefore, the Application for judicial review is granted. The matter is to be returned to a different Visa Officer for determination anew.

JUDGMENT THIS COURT’S JUDGMENT is that the application for judicial review be granted; the matter is returned to a different Visa Officer for determination anew. There is no serious question of general importance to be certified. "Michel M.J. Shore" Judge FEDERAL COURT SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET: IMM-2893-16 STYLE OF CAUSE: GERASIMOS TSARAOSI v THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario DATE OF HEARING: January 17, 2017 JUDGMENT AND REASONS: SHORE J. DATED: JANUARY 17, 2017 APPEARANCES : Mario D. Bellissimo For The Applicant Manuel Mendelzon For The Respondent SOLICITORS OF RECORD : Bellissimo Law Group Toronto, Ontario For The Applicant William F. Pentney Deputy Attorney General of Canada Toronto, Ontario For The Respondent