HANTA OUK V. CANADA (Minister Of Citizenship And Immigration) 2007 FC 891

I would like to write post on the subject below comments if I agree or not and why between 200 and 400 words with at least 2 references:

CHANTA OUK V. CANADA (Minister Of Citizenship And Immigration) 2007 FC 891
Hussam Namou
Vvvvvvv Collage

ChantaOuk V. Canada
Overview
ChantaOuk is a Canadian Citizen, who seeks a judicial review concerning a decision of an Immigration Appeal Division Panel Member. The date of the above Panel decision was dated February-May, 2007, dismissing an appeal from a Visa Officeri??s denial of Thorn Samboi??s sponsorship, the applicants husband, for a permanent residence in Canada. The two were courting for a given period and later got married in a ceremony while in Cambodia. The above paper, therefore, seeks to make an analysis of ChantaOuk V. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) 2007 FC 891.
Issue
The issue is that of the Immigration Appeal Division failing to consider the marriage of Ms. Ouk and Mr. Thorn to being Bona fide. The above ruling resulted in Ms. Ouk moving to the court to revert the ruling by the Appeal Division Panel.
Analysis
Section four (4) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulation, 2002, SOR/2002-227, a foreign national will not be determined a spouse if the marriage is not genuine. From the above section 4 clauses, it might have been hard for the Appeal Division Panel to authenticate that the two were legally married. The above section also allows Visa refusal if the person entered the relationship for status. In line with the above section, the Panel established that there existed deliberate evidence withholding and Visa application basically for status purposes (Schotel, 2013, p.24).

Case outcome before the Federal Court
Following the absence of clauses to establish whether the marriage was legal or not, the Judgment of the court was that the application be granted. Also to the above, the court further directed that the matter be remitted to a differently composed Immigration Appeal Division Panel for redetermination purposes.

Reference
Schotel, B. (2013). On the right of exclusion: law, ethics and immigration policy. Routledge.

Added on 10.06.2015 16:06
this is how the prof mark the Discussion