Whether we are private individuals, professionals, or businesspersons, we all end up having to deal with governments and submit applications. These might be for legal status such as citizenship, residency, or a permit, as well as seeking a benefit, licence, rezoning, variation, renewal, tax assessment, or a myriad of other possibilities. Sometimes, despite submitting what was thought to have been a solid application, the decision comes back negative. This can be very frustrating, particularly when there was a long delay waiting for the decision.

This article is based on my many years of experience in undertaking appeals in Canadian immigration and citizenship law. These appeals are part of general administrative law and so the issues I discuss here likely would be relevant for appeals against the government for many kinds of applications in Canada. 

As Shakespeare’s character Hamlet might have asked, had he been a regular person, and not a prince, “To appeal, or not to appeal, that is the question.”

Before you begin – caution is warranted.

There are many individuals who post comments on online discussion forums. Doing so does not make them an expert, even if they have posted hundreds of times. Depending on comments by persons who have no professional qualifications raises your level of risk. Such people may be well-meaning and can share some good pointers, but just as often their comments are made in context of their personal situation, which can never parallel your own exactly, and may reflect their experiences from when the law was different than now, or they are simply misinformed.

In deciding whether to appeal your own decision, the best course is to have your file reviewed by an experienced appeals / administrative law attorney who can perform the legal equivalent of an “X-ray” to see what happened and whether an appeal is advisable. (Your case might also require advice from other professionals to make your decision, such as an accountant, architect, medical doctor, etc.)

Your best choice might be not to appeal and not to reapply, but to apply under a different option you did not realize was open to you. An attorney can help you make that choice, too.

Is there an automatic right of appeal?

The answer to this may be stated in the decision notification itself, but such is not always the case, or may not be stated clearly. (Lots of double negatives and the like.)

In some legislation, provisions may prohibit or restrict appeal rights. (This is known as a privative clause.) In a similar vein, it may be necessary to request permission to appeal to the next level (board or court). Such requests are known as an Application for Leave. Even if there is a prohibition against an appeal, in Canada you may still be able to apply to the Superior Court or the Federal Court for judicial review.

What is required to start your appeal?

In addition to paying a filing fee, you need to know if you are obliged to explain your grounds of appeal fully when filing your case, or if you can give only a summary to start and complete your submissions later, and perhaps even add more points at a hearing. If an Application for Leave is required, you will likely have to set out all your arguments. You don’t want to show up at your hearing date prepared to make all manner of new arguments and learn you are stuck with what you submitted initially!

What is the legal delay to appeal?

Most statutes provide for time limits to file appeals. Be sure you find this out. The rules may not be obvious to a lay person. (“15 days after the day on which the applicant is informed, is deemed informed, or otherwise became aware of the decision” is typical of the jargon across all kinds of legislation.)

Legal delays are not suggestions! Even if the rules allow you to request an extension of time, the tribunal or court may have case law establishing that you need a significant reason such as a heart attack or fire on your premises to obtain an extension of dely. Procrastination is your enemy.

What kind of appeal is it?

We often see new clients who are confused as to what an appeal court or tribunal can do.

There are two main types of appeal, depending on the law applicable to your situation. A full appeal or appeal de novo will enable you to reargue your case and normally to update your file with new documents or facts. You may be allowed to add evidence that was available to you, but you did not include in your original application. In this kind of appeal, the tribunal or court may have the power to cancel the negative decision and make the decision that should have been made to begin with.

A narrower kind of appeal is a review or judicial review. In such cases, normally you are limited to making your arguments in relation to the file as it existed at the time of the decision. The best result you can obtain in this kind of appeal will be to have the refusal cancelled, and have the case studied by a new official. Only then might you be permitted to add additional evidence.

Was there an error in the decision?

We sometimes meet new clients referred from other law firms whose file was rejected, and they are determined to appeal “as a matter of principle”. We are always empathetic to the disappointment that may be experienced by you as our clients, but unless there was an important error in the case, you may be wasting your time and resources, and operating on false hopes, if you file an appeal.

For example, you might have been required to provide specific documents to support your application, but did not understand this requirement, or simply neglected to include them when applying. A refusal on the basis that your file was incomplete might not be an error at all unless the decision-maker was required to give you a notice to provide the missing items and did not do so.

By appealable errors, we mean those resulting from the decision-maker misunderstanding the evidence, or incorrectly applying the legal rules relevant to your case, or failing to respect procedural fairness, and perhaps possibly showing signs of bias, or a combination of these.

This leads to the next point.

Was the error serious enough to have made a difference in the outcome?

It may be that the decision-maker did indeed make mistakes in your case. But, if the errors related to matters that were not important to the merits of your file, you may not have much of a chance to win an appeal. (In legal jargon, these may be called “collateral” issues.)

Determining whether there are serious enough mistakes to file an appeal is also a question for a skilled appeals / administrative law attorney to help you resolve.

Will you have to testify?

Depending on the type of appeal necessary for your case, you may have to appear before a tribunal to testify. This is more likely with a full hearing on the case (de novo hearing). With Covid-19, most hearings are proceeding by testimony via Zoom or Teams. It is my view this practice will continue post coronavirus. But even if it is normal to testify for your type of appeal, it may be possible to settle your case without any formal testimony.

If you are required to testify, we at Fogarty Law Firm will review your entire case with you in detail.  We will help you practice responding to questions so that you will be able to answer truthfully and confidentially in court.  We will meet with you and your witnesses by videoconference, and you will be ready for any eventuality at your appeal hearing.

I already started my appeal.  Is it too late to use your firm?

Not at all!  Fogarty Law Firm can take over your file at any point you wish, even if you already started your appeal.  And if you retained someone to help you, you are not obliged to continue with the same individual.

Should you reapply / submit a new application instead of appealing?

Now, this is a big question! There are many factors to weigh. Here are some major concerns:

Are you bound by findings in the original decision (res judicata / chose jugée)

If the original decision-maker ruled on an important issue central to your kind of application, and you do not appeal, this point becomes a decided matter in law. So, applying again to the same agency for the same kind of application will likely face another refusal. For example, if you are sponsoring your spouse and the Immigration Officer decided she married you with the main goal of using you as a bridge to enter Canada, filing a new sponsorship will not resolve that finding. The new decision-maker will feel bound to follow the earlier ruling on that issue.

Your reputation

If the original decision-maker concluded that you were dishonest, untruthful, exaggerated, lacked credibility, had engaged in outright misrepresentation, or similar conclusions, you will want to strongly consider filing an appeal if for no other reason than to go on record disputing such findings. Consider as well, you may be obliged to declare negative results from previous government applications when applying again, and even for a different kind of application, here or abroad. For example, Canadian Immigration forms will ask you if you have ever been refused entry to another country. Also, if your file were dealt with by a tribunal or court, most such proceedings are available to the public so anyone could have access to the final decision. Do you want a negative ruling affecting your reputation all over the Internet?

Your time

With the after-effects of Covid-19 still being felt on government processing, you want to balance the published / likely processing timelines for new applications vs. filing an appeal. This is especially important if you are faced with a situation requiring a quick solution. Note that if you appeal, the appeals officer / tribunal may have the power to fast-track your file if your appeal is granted. This is an important point to check. If so, your overall time then might possibly be faster going the appeal route – presuming you win your appeal!

Sometimes you can get the result you want faster by reapplying and providing additional info or documents that the original decision-maker stated were missing or unclear when you applied the first time.

Your money

In addition to the filing fees and paying fees of lawyers and possibly experts if you appeal, you want to weigh all this against the cost of doing nothing and living with the negative decision. If it is preventing you from achieving your goals, such as impeding your family’s reunification, putting roadblocks in the way of your business, or other important concerns, consider all the related costs involved.

Conclusion

Receiving negative rulings from government officials and tribunals in applications you worked so hard to prepare presents disappointment and challenges. General standards of excellence seem to have dipped in many areas, more so during the second wave of Covid-19. Government agents do not appear immune from this tendency, and we must keep in mind it is not always easy for them working remotely from home trying to make their way through application files comprised of many pages of documents using a small, government supplied laptop reading PDFs all day long. Consider your refused application in relation to your main personal, legal, business, and other goals. Then seek professional advice to help you decide whether to appeal, reapply, or move on to different matters. The application you did not even know was available to you might be the best choice. The important thing is to decide what to do and be well-informed doing so.

We at Fogarty Law Firm enjoy helping people review their files to determine what approach is best suited to your requirements, when answering the question of whether you should appeal, reapply, or look for another solution. If your particular legal area is not one we are familiar with, we can help you find an attorney who is. Looking forward to hearing from you!

Contact us at 514-633-9289 or send us a note at www.fogartylaw.ca/contact to get started.

 Photo credit: (c) 2021, Stephen J Fogarty Québec Court of Appeal, Montréal, Canada

Classical music and social transformation

He explained the philosophy behind El Sistema, which instills in children the viewpoint that participation in music is a right, not a privilege, a democratization of culture and learning. As he said, learning music can instill self-confidence to help children and persons of all ages to improve their lives and skills in reaching for whatever they wish to achieve in their lives. With a look of joy in his eyes, Mr. Payare spoke of how this approach to music has remained constant with him, even now as a rising star in the world of classical music conductors.

He noted that an orchestra is a living organism, functioning within a community, and it is to be expected that it be connected to the larger society’s evolution. He expressed his desire to work to further the social outreach of the OSM in community learning and social development, which was expanded greatly under the leadership of the former Music Director, Kent Nagano, whose mandate ran from 2006-2020.

New musical adventures to come

Maestro Rafael Payare will take up the position of Designated Music Director on September 1st, 2021. According to the OSM, he will assume his full duties beginning with the 2022-2023 season, for a period of at least five seasons.

Following the announcement by Kent Nagano that he would be leaving the Orchestra at the end of the 2019-2020 season, a flow of visiting conductors came through the Maison Symphonique. As a season ticket holder, I experienced several of the possible candidates showcasing their talents. The concert among these I was most impressed with took place in September 2018, which I attended with my daughter Clare. The concert featured Schoenberg’s Verklärte Nacht, Mozart’s Violin Concerto No. 3 (solo by concertmaster Andrew Wan) and Beethoven’s Symphony No. 3, the mighty Eroica. It was evident that night that the visiting Maestro had made a solid connection with the musicians, who gave a thrilling performance for the public with their revitalised interpretation of these famous musical works.

After the concert, I commented to the person sitting on my left, a respected music critic for a local newspaper, that the Orchestra should hire the visiting conductor as their new leader on the spot. The visitor in question was Rafael Payare, and my words were quoted in the critic’s article in Le Devoir on the OSM’s appointment.

Supporting the arts

Recognizing these are difficult times, perhaps you might consider supporting the arts, with even a small donation, to help maintain these shining lights of our civilization, especially given current shuttering of events and their lost revenues due to Covid. I am proud that my office Fogarty Law Firm is among the major donors to the OSM.

Photo: (c) Stephen J Fogarty – OSM receives applause after debut Montréal concert of Maestro Rafael Payare, 2018-09-27

On July 1, 1867, the British North America Act was passed in the UK Parliament, forming the country Canada out of a group of colonies. The British statute’s name reflected an important idea behind the creation of this new country, to help defend the interests of the British Empire vis-à-vis the expanding territory of the United States.  Minority language, religious and educational rights were debated at length leading up to Confederation in 1867 and were reflected somewhat in the agreement reached. Over time, Canada gained full autonomy internationally while expanding to a total of 10 provinces and two, later three territories.

Canada’s perception of individual rights evolved as well, improving generally but with recognized stains on our history. For example, much is still left to be done in reconciliation with the First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples, and recent calls for action have been brought forward by groups such as BLM, and others. Historically, our immigration policies have sometimes been based on theories that now seem obviously irrational but were advanced in full sincerity by their proponents at those times. This may be illustrated by an interesting article in the McGill Journal of Medicine by Clare Fogarty on the history of medical inadmissibility in Canadian immigration.

It is easy to criticize ideas held by leaders in the past, but they were at least a partial product of their time. Concepts about human rights and the dignity of all persons have evolved over the years, no less than developments in science, industry, public education, and medicine. To put it another way, some ideas, and realities we may now take for granted had not even been thought of yet even 20 years ago. But this does not mean that every “old” concept has no value. Many insights into human nature penned by philosophers and historians from ancient times can speak wisdom to us today.

Although Canada’s record on individual rights has not been perfect, and much work lies ahead, it would be remiss to ignore the fact that people from all over the globe strive to join us every year. The level of new permanent residents to Canada has increased from 227,000 in 2000 to over 341,000 in 2019. Although Covid-19 has slowed down processing this year, there is no reason not to expect that levels will increase in the years to come.

Canada is a magnet to people from all over the world. Our society may not yet be where we wish it could be, but still shines as a bright star in the collection of nations forming our human family. We have many reasons to celebrate the great steps taken in our first 153 years this July 1^st. We are an evolving collection of ideas, not just a physical space on our planet.

A personal epilogue – In my work as an immigration lawyer for over 30 years, I have been proud to help thousands of clients build a better future in Canada, as permanent residents and later as citizens. Throughout the process, we have always strived to ensure that the individual dignity and rights of our clients are respected by the authorities. We are ready to help you should you like to seek assistance in realizing your dream of stability, safety, and freedom, in Canada.

____

Photo: Holding up the Maple Leaf (c) 2017 by Stephen J. Fogarty

And so, we have received numerous inquiries from clients who “have heard” their sponsorship case may be cancelled by the government if either the sponsor or the person being sponsored, or both of them, receives payments under the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB).

Sponsorship rules are strict, and if the sponsor or sponsored person receives social assistance, AKA welfare, this may lead to problems, unless the benefits are paid due to a disability. But social assistance in Canada is a matter of provincial jurisdiction. The Government of Canada (federal government) has been aware of these rumours about CERB and stated clearly on their website that receiving such funds will not by itself endanger a sponsorship.

Nevertheless, it is important to keep in mind that social assistance rules vary from province to province. If you are contemplating applying for a benefit offered by a provincial or municipal government, make sure your province does not qualify this somehow as a form of social assistance, even though they may publicize it as a Coronavirus relief measure.

I hope you have found this information helpful to reduce some of your concerns. If you would like to have help and advice on your sponsorship, why not reach out to us for an individual consultation? Like the happy couple shown, you deserve to secure your life as a couple along the road you have chosen for yourselves.

Call us at 514-289-9289 or use the contact form on our website to get started today.

Note – This Blog is provided for information purposes only, considered accurate as of April 29, 2020. It is not legal advice. Government policies may evolve by the time you read this article.

Photo: A happy couple by Stephen J Fogarty (c) 2020

Although all religions recognize the importance of individual prayer, or meditation if you prefer to call it, an essential aspect of religious belief involves community expression. This may realize itself in group recitation of certain prayers, hearing readings from a holy book, lessons from a leader, as well as participating in chants, songs and other music. Experiencing the presence of others at the same gathering, hearing and even feeling their words reverberating in ourselves, noting the rising temperature in the room from all the bodies therein, the candles, greetings of welcome and good-byes to each other, all of these are linked in our understanding of what it is to express our faith.

If you attended a party on December 31^st, 2019, and asked anyone what they thought about social distancing, they may well have thought you had imbibed too much and were speaking nonsense. Not even four months later, this has become a famous term across the globe. We are told by government leaders, celebrities, and large corporations, that even in isolation, “we are all in this together”. Washing our hands and maintaining social distancing, or more accurately physical distancing, will be our safest route out of the Coronavirus crisis.

But we are not together when we are apart. Attending Easter Mass by watching television, replacing large family gatherings by Skype or Facetime, even using the clichéd “clearest screens on the best devices”, is a poor substitute to personal interaction. It is not the same. We will miss the noise, somewhat rambunctious children, hugs from family members, toasts, and certain know-it-all in-laws, and occasional family arguments. Part of what will make this Passover and Easter celebrations harder will not necessarily be the fact we cannot all be together, since most years there were likely some family members missing for various reasons, such as sports tournaments, but because we have no choice in the matter. This lack of choice in being separated is kind of like the sadness we feel when for the first year a family member has passed and is no longer with us to celebrate.

There will be some religious leaders who will do all they can to flaunt the scientifically based rules against congregating this spring, believing that their supreme being will spare their congregation, due to their elevated piousness and the certainty of their faith. These preachers should be ashamed of themselves, endangering their followers, even the little children in their community. Let’s make an analogy. If a severe hurricane were battering the coast, would these geniuses hold a prayer service on a seaside boardwalk? COVID-19 is also a phenomenon of nature.

So, let’s do our best to celebrate together with our own self-isolated family, and involve our extended family and friends from a distance using the technology available to each of us. There are sure to be better days ahead in the months that come. Best wishes to you and your families in these dangerous times.

Photo creidit: Single Candle by 4028mdk09 – Wikimedia Commons licence

These con artists are using “COVID-19” and “Corona virus” to trick you into believing they are there to help or provide a valuable service. Don’t let these words and related terms such as “pandemic” and “the crisis” lull you into a false sense of security. Be extra vigilant when receiving unsolicited emails or phone calls using any of these terms. These fraudsters have only one goal – to obtain your personal and financial information, and your passwords, so they can steal from you.

Here’s an example. This week I received an email, seemingly from RBC, a reputable Canadian bank, stating it contained “important Coronavirus advice”. But there were three telltale signs the email was not legitimate. First, it was sent to an email address I don’t use for banking purposes. Second, the English language was weak, pretending to be from “RBC Costumer Management”. RBC certainly has customer service, but they don’t deal in costumes or costumer management, whatever that might be. Third, when hovering my cursor over the return address, it could be seen that the sender was not from RBC. So, I deleted the email.

Your best policy is to delete unsolicited emails from banks, telephone providers, etc., and don’t click on any links therein or open attachments. Instead, sign in directly to the online accounts where you transact your banking and other affairs. There you will see first-hand any legitimate notifications meant for you. Don’t share your passwords with anyone.

And if you receive a telephone call from a stranger who starts yacking on about the virus, hang up. You don’t owe politeness to fraudsters.

We all want to take care of our physical health during this crisis. Keep watch over your financial health too.

We at Fogarty Law Firm want you to know we are there for you in these difficult times. If you would like to consider immigrating to Canada, or are already here but unsure of your situation and might like some help, you may reach out to us here.

Photo: Impression of the RBC main building, Place Ville Marie, Montreal © Stephen J Fogarty 2020

This is a difficult and uncertain time for people around the world as we wait to see where COVID-19 Coronavirus is heading. If you want to move to Canada, stay in Canada or to become a Canadian citizen, don’t let this virus take away your dreams! Don’t give up.

Fogarty Law Firm is ready to help you. If you are weary about travelling or heading out through crowds of people to attend meetings, don’t worry! We can meet with you by Skype or telephone, supplemented by emails, from the initial consultation through to the end of most legal procedures.

Note that legal delays continue to run so if you have already started an application on your own, or if your case was refused and you are considering an appeal, you still must act diligently to take the necessary steps to preserve your rights.

If you still prefer to meet in person, we are taking such appointments as well. Our Firm’s policies on COVID-19 are posted on our Facebook page, which you are welcome to follow to obtain other useful information.

Looking forward to speaking with you soon. Let Fogarty Law Firm help you secure a better future in Canada!

Photo: © Stephen J Fogarty 2020

However, according to the new service standard announced by the IAD effective April 1, 2019, the delays until a hearing or other resolution of an appeal should average one year in 80% of cases filed starting from that date. In addition, the plan is to finalize the inventory of appeals filed prior to April 1^st by early 2020.

This is welcome news. In my Blog “Long delays damaging integrity of Canada’s immigration appeal process” from May 19, 2017, I wrote, “These long delays risk bringing the integrity of the entire immigration system into disrepute. The appeal system enacted by Canada’s Parliament as a safeguard against possibly unfair decisions by individual officers has become so inefficient that it is no longer a viable option for many people.”

Now that the delays will be reasonable, individuals should once again consider an appeal at the IAD as a real possibility for their overall immigration strategy.

Filing an appeal may now be especially attractive in sponsorship situations, rather than making a new application following a refusal by the visa office, which might result in a second visa office refusal. Another factor in sponsorship matters is that by not appealing a negative visa office decision, your rights to file a new application to bring your loved ones to Canada may be limited due to the legal principle of res judicata, also known in Canadian law as chose jugée. (We will discuss this issue in a future Blog.)

The shorter delays at the IAD will also be important in residency appeal files, and for criminality appeals. In sum, persons affected, and their families, will no longer have to put their lives “on hold” for overly long periods of time while facing the stress of an uncertain future all along.

Thus, if you have received a refusal in your immigration file, it is in your interests to consult a Canadian immigration attorney for an analysis of your situation. Remember, there are strict legal delays in which you may file an appeal at the IAD!

Photo: IAD hearing room © Stephen J Fogarty

Recently, I was shopping for some juice. The lettering on the container shown in part in the photo here caught my eye, as it was designed to do. Well done marketers!

A quick glance had me assured I was looking at 100% juice, but the finer print states “and other ingredients”. What does this mean? Basically, the claim about the juice itself becomes meaningless. If, for example, there are 80% other ingredients, the product becomes 20% juice. Unhappy with what I concluded was a bad effort at deception, I picked another brand.

This reminds me of the automotive industry. Of course, whenever you purchase a new car, as opposed to a used vehicle, truthfully it is “all new”, not used or “pre-owned”, as the industry prefers to say.

But that is not the meaning the automotive industry is pushing with their claims every year that each model is “all new” and/or “completely redesigned”. In reality, the automotive industry is making claims that are patently false. Imagine the price of a new car if the manufacturers had to start from scratch on R & D, design, parts and manufacturing to produce a vehicle that was all new every year. There would be no way to average out these costs over six years, which, in fact, is what happens with most models. Apparently, the auto industry has concluded that its products cannot be noticed if they are simply “new”. So, the “all new” claim becomes necessary.

It’s no wonder consumers are skeptical about products and services. The juice and auto examples mentioned here illustrate that industry-imposed standards are not effective. Business has only itself to blame for governments having to step in on consumer protection. Many corporations are all to eager to approve of individual advertisements and marketing campaigns that often stretch the truth or amount to outright lies. As Seth Godin writes in “All Marketers are Liars (Tell Stories)”:

“’We’re just serving the market’, ‘We’re satisfying people’s needs’, and ‘Adults have the right to make a decision about this’ are the words of a weasel. Crafting a story that tricks people into making short-term decisions that they regret in the long run is the worst kind of marketing sin. Refusing to take responsibility for it afterward is just cowardice.” (p. 131)

It is not surprising people have become very skeptical of claims made in media spots and on the Internet. But each entrepreneur in business and in the professions can decide to set a positive example, to be forthright in our advertising and claims, to help break the chain of suspicion. Especially as attorneys, it is important not to give false hopes to clients, and to provide honest and impartial advice. How else can we be our clients’ advocates, their professional problem solvers?

This general rule was cited in a legal challenge to compulsory language testing of principal (main) applicants seeking permanent residency under Canada’s federal Express Entry or EE system. The Federal Court of Appeal ruled on this issue during January 2018, in a case known as Cabral. The Court considered whether applicants who had been unable to obtain the minimum language test scores required for Canadian permanent residency under at least one official language, English or French, could ask an officer to exempt them from this requirement, if they could show they would become economically established in Canada.

The answer of the Court was a resounding “no”. In a 3-0 ruling, the Court held that the discretionary powers of immigration officers are limited. Canada’s Immigration Minister has the power to set language requirements for the better administration of public policy as it relates to our immigration needs. Moreover, immigration policy is not only a question of economic factors, but also social integration. As stated in the Court’s judgment:

“… it is not inconsistent with the flexibility granted to Immigration Officers under … the Regulations to require that the Department weed out applications from those who fail to meet minimum language proficiency criteria before they are processed, thereby rendering their applications ineligible for substitute evaluation … the ability to become economically established is a narrower notion than the goal of fostering rapid integration: an individual may be economically established but not integrated into Canadian society, especially if he or she cannot communicate in one of Canada’s official languages.”

Watch out for crooked consultants

Therefore, if you meet with an “immigration consultant” who offers you a “service” whereby, for a fee, he or she will request a federal immigration officer to exempt you from language testing, know then you are in the presence of a crook, and walk out the door as fast as you can. Federal immigration officers simply do not have power to override minimum official language skill requirements under the EE system.

Other key points to consider

Candidates for Canadian immigration must take a test administered through one of the services “designated” by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada. Take the test required for your desired program, as the minimum scores required vary.

Our clients’ collective experience shows that if you take time to prepare for language tests, such as at least familiarizing yourself with how the tests work, trying some practice questions or tests, or even reviewing preparation manuals, chances are you will do better than “winging it” without any preparation. It is not just a matter of obtaining the minimum scores required. The higher you score, the more points you receive, and the better will be your chances of selection for Canadian immigration Also, if you have a spouse or common-law partner, their language test scores may help improve an Express Entry file, even though it is not compulsory for them to take the test.

There are also some distinctions regarding the language scores required for certain provincial nominee programs in relation to some types of job offers used to support immigration applications. These variations are not the same as requesting an exemption.

As ever, applying for immigration is key procedure for your future. You are best served to seek professional guidance in this, as in any important venture. It is easy to be tempted to rely on free advice. However, as the wise Dr. Samuel Johnson would have said, the value most often received from free advice is exactly what was paid for it.

Photo credit: Cover of Dr. Samuel Johnson’s English Dictionary and Grammar, published London, 1755, from johnsonsdictionaryonline.com