Has anyone seen any new cessation cases on Canlii? I haven't seen any lately. Maybe all the cases are waiting up on gagaram case which is expected to take place in April or May. Anyone has any ideas?
New as of when? New in what regard?
Yes, there continue to be various decisions addressing refugee status cessation by the Federal Court, as published in CanII, with some signs that the Federal Court may be allowing relief from the consequences of cessation in certain circumstances, or at least allowing further litigation before deportation.
Lin v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 185 (CanLII),
https://canlii.ca/t/k2mw4
February decision in which the Fed Court in effect remanded application for PR based on H&C and alternative application for TRP
Farahani v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 423 (CanLII),
https://canlii.ca/t/k3gtw
March decision in which the Fed Court seems to have applied a rather strict standard to decisions by the RPD to justify setting aside the RPD cessation decision; in this case Farahani had traveled to the home country 16 times. At a glance this seems to signal a recognition, at least by this particular Federal Court Justice, of the profoundly detrimental impact of cessation and the court's willingness to give at least some of those affected some significant procedural protection . . . while how it will eventually go is not clear, there is not much to suggest Farahani will succeed in avoiding cessation longterm.
IN CONTRAST there is
Naqvi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 365 (CanLII),
https://canlii.ca/t/k3k2z
This too is a March 2024 decision but in which the Federal Court upheld cessation decision by the RPD against Syed Asad Hussain Naqvi who only traveled to the home country ONCE, to visit an ill parent.
Another related case, from February, is Karam v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 343 (CanLII),
https://canlii.ca/t/k35hj in which the Federal Court allowed an appeal in effect allowing this individual, whose status in Canada was lost attendant cessation, to pursue claims precluding deportation, based on a need for protection, despite the cessation.
There may be more that are "new" relative to previously discussed decisions.
There are reasons to not put much weight on the Farahani decision, in terms of what it says about others facing cessation, based on some specific factors in that case . . . whereas, in contrast, especially in regards to those who are assessing their risks, the Naqvi case very much indicates that Canada is continuing to prosecute cessation and that even just one trip to the home country can result in cessation. So, again, those potentially at risk for cessation absolutely should NOT be traveling to the home country.