Canadian Immigration Law - Grounds Of Inadmissibility

The sole criteria or factor governing whether any foreign national coming from abroad, and arriving at a Canadian port-of-entry is: (in)admissibility. What does it mean, what does it include (or not include), and what are the repercussions in either a positive or negative scenario, for a foreign national wishing to enter Canada?

Every foreign national who arrives at Canada’s port-of-entry must have permission to enter Canada. They either must have a pre-approved visa prior to arriving in Canada, or if they are from a visa-exempt country, they must be evaluated at the port-of-entry for admissibility.

So what constitutes inadmissibility?

According to Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, there are a number of grounds on which visitors to Canada could be deemed as inadmissible. These include:

• Security – A(34)
• Human or international rights violations – A(35)
• Serious criminality – A(36)
• Organized criminality – A(37)
• Health grounds – A(38)
• Financial grounds – A(39)
• Misrepresentation – A(40)
• Non-compliance with Act – A(41)
• Inadmissible family member – A(42)

Clearly the first four grounds of security, human or international rights violations, serious criminality and organized criminality refer to an individual’s past actions. These are relatively self-explanatory from a security and public safety perspective. Similarly, for health grounds if an individual poses a threat to public health safety, or might cause excessive demand on health or social services. These grounds also would make an individual inadmissible to Canada.

Financial grounds refers to the foreign national’s ability to financially support themselves while they are in Canada.

Misrepresentation refers to a serious offence whereby the foreign national is not or has not been truthful in their responses to the CBSA or CIC officer. This could include directly or indirectly misrepresenting or withholding material facts that could lead to a CBSA or CIC decision making a decision based on wrong facts, being or having been sponsored by a person who is determined to be inadmissible because of misrepresentation. Anyone found to be guilty of misrepresentation faces a maximum fine of $100,000, and/or 5 years in prison, and would be barred from entering Canada for 5 years after their sentence was served.

Non-compliance is similar as the foreign national may have already violated the specific terms of previous trips to Canada, and as such are denied entry into Canada, or in the case of a permanent resident, has not met their residency obligations to maintain their permanent resident status. In each case, non-compliance is not fulfilling the specific terms for being admitted into Canada.

Last on the list, accompanying an inadmissible family member due to any of the previously mentioned grounds, makes both foreign nationals inadmissible to Canada. Unfortunately for the second traveler, Canadian immigration law makes that individual "guilty by association". An accompanying family member includes a spouse, common-law partner, dependent child or dependent child of a dependent child (grandchild) of the foreign national found inadmissible.

If any foreign national is found to be admissible by any of the grounds previously listed, they would be told either – to leave on the next available flight out of the country without entering Canada; or possibly admitted with terms and conditions, including the payment of a deposit or posting of a guarantee for compliance with the conditions; or be detained at an immigration detention centre until they can leave on the next available flight, or could be released with conditions, after a detention hearing. If they choose not to leave immediately, then an S(44) report would be prepared, along with the terms and conditions the CBSA officer deems necessary, along with a removal order outlining whether they will be allowed back into Canada and under what conditions.

All of these grounds for inadmissibility are serious immigration issues, and for any foreign national found in violation of any of these, they would be wise to choose immediate departure in order to not affect any future admittance to Canada. If the foreign national were to leave the country immediately, an S(44) report would not be prepared, nor would any removal order be written up affecting their future possibility of returning to Canada successfully.

If you or anybody you know has encountered these grounds for inadmissibility to Canada, it would be recommended that you seek the counsel of a licensed immigration lawyer prior to traveling, if you have any intentions of returning to Canada successfully in the future. The seriousness of these inadmissibility grounds is quite wide and encompassing, and so the counsel of an immigration expert would be very helpful in order to return to Canada successfully.

About The Author:

Matt Bomer is an expert in immigration law who also likes to write many interesting articles and blogs, helping people understand many aspects of these regulations and make the right decisions.