{"id":11947,"date":"2015-04-02T19:29:54","date_gmt":"2015-04-02T19:29:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/immigrationca.staging.wpengine.com\/fr\/song-v-canada-citizenship-and-immigration\/"},"modified":"2016-12-03T09:06:04","modified_gmt":"2016-12-03T09:06:04","slug":"song-v-canada-citizenship-and-immigration","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/immigration.ca\/fr\/song-v-canada-citizenship-and-immigration\/","title":{"rendered":"Song v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)"},"content":{"rendered":"

2015-02-04 |\u00a02015 FC 141 |\u00a0IMM-4550-13<\/p>\n

Song v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Principles Established<\/strong><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. An applicant for Canadian Experience class permanent residency cannot be rejected merely because his employment experience does not match the exact wording of the required employment duties listed in the National Occupation Classification [NOC]. <\/span><\/li>\n
  2. Such an application also cannot be rejected merely because the applicant\u2019s previous employment experience failed to include one of the duties listed under the NOC.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Facts<\/strong><\/p>\n

    Song applied for judicial review of the decision of a visa officer to reject his application for permanent residency as a member of the Canadian Experience Class. He had applied under the National Occupation Classification of Retail and Wholesale Trade Manager.<\/p>\n

    The officer rejected Song\u2019s application because he did not meet the skilled work experience requirement. Song had provided a letter outlining his duties as storefront manager at a Toronto pharmacy but the visa officer argued that the duties listed in the letter did not specifically match the duties required under the NOC. Furthermore, the officer argued that Song\u2019s letter had failed to mention that Song had studied competitors\u2019 sales operations, which is one of the requirements duties listed under the NOC.<\/p>\n

    Decision<\/strong><\/p>\n

    The Federal Court found the officer\u2019s decision to have been unreasonable for two reasons. Firstly, the Court opined that an applicant\u2019s written employment experience does not have to match the exact wording of the duties listed under the NOC in order to meet the experience requirement. Secondly, the Court opined that if an applicant\u2019s written employment experience does not include one of the required duties, his application should not automatically be disqualified.<\/p>\n

    Song\u2019s work experience was deemed by the Court to have satisfied all relevant requirements under the NOC except for the requirement concerning competitor\u2019s sales operations.<\/p>\n

    The court thus quashed the officer\u2019s rejection of Song\u2019s application and returned the application for reconsideration by another officer.<\/p>\n

     <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    2015-02-04 |\u00a02015 FC 141 |\u00a0IMM-4550-13 Song v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) Principles Established An applicant for Canadian Experience class permanent residency cannot be rejected merely because his employment experience does not match the exact wording of the required employment duties listed in the National Occupation Classification [NOC]. Such an application also cannot be rejected merely…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5519,5511,5521,3337],"tags":[4920,3354,4921,3355,3356,4922,4923],"class_list":["post-11947","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-2015-fr","category-c99-canada-case-law-fr","category-february-fr","category-non-classifiee","tag-application-rejection-noc-fr","tag-canada-fr","tag-canadian-experience-class-permanent-residency-fr","tag-citizenship-fr","tag-immigration-fr","tag-noc-fr","tag-song-fr","category-5519","category-5511","category-5521","category-3337","description-off"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/immigration.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11947","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/immigration.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/immigration.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/immigration.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/immigration.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=11947"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/immigration.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11947\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/immigration.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=11947"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/immigration.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=11947"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/immigration.ca\/fr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=11947"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}