TAIWO OMOLARA PETERS ADEOLA OLUWANIFEMI PETERS AUGUSTUS OLUWADARASIMI PETERS AYODEJI OLUWASHANUMI PETERS Applicants v. THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION, 2023 FC 762

Date: 20230531 Docket: IMM-6848-22 Citation: 2023 FC 762 Toronto, Ontario, May 31, 2023 PRESENT: The Honourable Madam Justice Heneghan BETWEEN:TAIWO OMOLARA PETERS ADEOLA OLUWANIFEMI PETERS AUGUSTUS OLUWADARASIMI PETERS AYODEJI OLUWASHANUMI PETERSApplicantsandTHE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATIONRespondent REASONS AND JUDGMENT [1]Ms.

Taiwo Omolara Peters (the “Principal Applicant”) and her three minor children, Adeola Oluwanifemi Peters, AugustusOluwadarasimi Peters, and Ayodeji Oluwashanumi Peters (collectively “the Applicants”) seek judicial review of the decision of anofficer (the “Officer”), refusing their application for permanent residence in Canada, on Humanitarian and Compassionate (“H andC”) grounds, pursuant to subsection 25(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27. [2]The Applicants are citizens of Nigeria.

Their claims for protection in Canada were rejected on credibility grounds and anapplication for leave and judicial review was dismissed. [3]In the present proceeding, the Applicants argue that the Officer unreasonably ignored the Principal Applicant’s contribution toCanadian society during the Covid-19 pandemic when she worked as a personal support worker. [4]The Applicants further submit that the Officer unreasonably assessed the best interests of the children, specifically their accessto adequate education in Nigeria, when evidence was provided about shortcomings in public education in Nigeria. [5]The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (the “Respondent”) argues that the decision is reasonable and that there is no basisfor judicial intervention. [6]Following the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v.

Vavilov, 2019SCC 65 , [2019] 4 S.C.R. 653, the decision is reviewable on the standard of reasonableness. [7]In considering reasonableness, the Court is to ask if the decision under review ""bears the hallmarks of reasonableness —justification, transparency and intelligibility — and whether it is justified in relation to the relevant factual and legal constraintsthat bear on the decision""; see Vavilov, supra at paragraph 99. [8]I agree largely with the submissions of the Respondent. [9]The Officer made reasonable findings about the establishment of the Principal Applicant in Canada.

The fact that the PrincipalApplicant worked as a personal support worker during the Covid-19 pandemic is not relevant to the issue of establishment sincethe Principal Applicant did not qualify for the "“Pathway Program”" in any event. [10]Likewise, the Officer reached a reasonable conclusion about the education available to the minor Applicants in Nigeria. Thefact that the public education system may be inferior to the public education system available to these Applicants in Canada doesnot make the Officer’s conclusion unreasonable.

The Officer, not the Court, is mandated to weigh the evidence submitted. [11]In the result, the application for judicial review will be dismissed. There is no question for certification. JUDGMENT in IMM-6848-22 THIS COURT’S JUDGMENT is that the application for judicial review is dismissed. There is no question for certification. “E. Heneghan” Judge

FEDERAL COURT SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: IMM-6848-22 STYLE OF CAUSE: TAIWO OMOLARA PETERS ET AL. v. THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario DATE OF HEARING: MAY 17, 2023 REASONS AND JUDGMENT: HENEGHAN J. DATED: MAY 31, 2023 APPEARANCES : Daisy Sun FOR THE APPLICANTS Pavel Filatov FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD : AKM Law Toronto, Ontario FOR THE APPLICANTS Attorney General of Canada Toronto, Ontario FOR THE RESPONDENT