How We Overturned a 5-Year Ban to Canada: A Story of Fairness, Family, and Compassion
At Adriana Ryckman Immigration Consulting (ARIC), we believe that behind every immigration case is a human story — one that deserves fairness, dignity, and understanding.
Recently, our firm successfully helped a client overcome a five-year inadmissibility ban to Canada that was issued under Section 40(2)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) — a section that deals with misrepresentation.
⚖️ The Challenge: A Five-Year Ban for Misrepresentation
Our client, Ms. O.M.A., a Nigerian national, had previously applied for a visitor visa to visit her family in Canada. Without her knowledge, the representative she hired was unlicensed — a “ghost consultant.” This individual submitted false information on her application, leading IRCC to find misrepresentation and impose a five-year ban.
The worst part? A procedural fairness letter (PFL) — which should have given her a chance to explain the situation — was sent directly to the unlicensed agent, not to her. The agent never informed her, and the applicant was issued a 5 year ban to Canada.
💡 Our Approach: Restoring Fairness
We built our case on two key pillars:
Procedural Fairness Breach
IRCC’s own policy states that every applicant must:Be informed of the officer’s concerns, and
Have a meaningful opportunity to respond.
Our client never had that chance. We demonstrated that she was denied her right to be heard — a fundamental breach of procedural fairness. This was because the agent never informed her of the letter.
Humanitarian and Compassionate (H&C) Grounds
Using section 25 of the IRPA, we asked the Minister to exercise discretion to waive the inadmissibility, emphasizing:The emotional and psychological hardship caused by prolonged family separation;
The best interests of her three Canadian nephews, who had been deeply affected by her absence; and
The impossibility of family travel to Nigeria due to security and travel advisories.
❤️ The Human Side of the Case
Our client’s Canadian sister, a frontline healthcare worker during the COVID-19 pandemic, had not seen her sibling in years. The children, ages 8 to 15, missed their aunt deeply — their cultural link to their Nigerian heritage and the only family member fluent in Igbo.
We cited Mohammed v. Canada (2022 FC 1), a Federal Court decision that recognized the moral debt owed to immigrant healthcare workers during the pandemic. We argued that granting this family a visit was not only lawful but compassionate — a small measure of gratitude toward a Canadian family that gave so much during a global crisis.
🌍 The Outcome: Ban Lifted, Family Reunited
Following our detailed submission and supporting documentation — including GCMS notes, proof of employment, property ownership, community ties, and evidence of procedural error — IRCC approved the visitor visa and lifted the five-year bar.
For the first time in years, this family was reunited in Canada.
📚 Legal References
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, s. 40(2)(a) (Misrepresentation)
s. 25 IRPA (Humanitarian and Compassionate Considerations)
IRCC Operational Bulletin: Procedural Fairness Requirements
Mohammed v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2022 FC 1
