ANSWER THE QUESTIONS

SELECT ONE

1. If Liz's daughter robbed someone when she was 15 years old and received a punishment of 1 year of house arrest as a young offender in her country of origin, does this have an implication on her Permanent Resident application in Canada?

a) There would not be an issue in this circumstance, but the family would have to wait until the daughter is deemed rehabilitated to begin the immigration process.

b) Liz would now only be able to sponsor her other daughter to join her in Canada

c) Liz and her dependents children are inadmissible

d) There would be no issue in this circumstance

2. Is there any way that a crime committed when a person was a juvenile could make that person inadmissible to Canada?

a) Yes, but only if the person was charged as a young offender

b) No. Regardless of the crime, if the person was under the age of 22, they would not be inadmissible because of this crime.

c) No. Regardless of the crime, if the person was under the age of 18, they would not be inadmissible because of this crime

c) Yes, but only if the person would have been convicted as an adult in Canada

3. Laila was very excited about starting her new life in Toronto as she was recently selected in a draw under the express entry. However, when she went for her medical exam, the doctor asked about her health in general and she notice that she was not feeling very well for a few months after conducting some tests, the doctor determined that Laila had somewhere contracted Active Pulmonary Tuberculosis, a highly dangerous and contagious disease, for which there is known cure other than bed-rest. What is likely to be outcome of this reading her application for permanent residence?

a) She is likely to be inadmissible due to danger her disease could pose to the Canadian public

b) She is still likely to be accepted for permanent residency as she far exceeds the minimum required comprehensive ranking system points.

c) She is likely to be inadmissible for misrepresentation

d) She is still likely to be accepted for permanent residency since there is an exception for medical disease as long as they would not cost the taxpayer than $2000 per year to treat

4. Before issuing a TRP, what would the delegate authority determine?

a) The need for refugee to enter or remain Canada is compelling

b) The need for the foreign national to enter or remain in Canada is necessary to an individual who is a permanent resident or a Canadian citizen

c) The need for the foreign national's presence in Canada outweighs any risk to Canadians or Canadian society

d) The need for the foreign national to enter o remain in Canada is necessary to the individual

5. William was member of the governing council of the government of Kenya and was in charge of enforcing the government guidelines for new reporters. The minister has determined that the period during which William was in the governing council the government committed crimes against humanity. William claims that he did not know anything about the genocide happening in the country at that time. Therefore, he cannot be held accountable for the actions of others. In addition, the work he did as a member of the government during that time was completely legal according to the laws of his country. It is possible and legal for William to be inadmissible on grounds of violating international rights for being in the government council at that time?

a) No, he would not be inadmissible because Kenya is a non DCO country

b) Yes, he would likely be inadmissible

c) yes, he would be inadmissible under criminality

d) No, he would not be inadmissible because he did not know about the genocide happening

6. Luis a Mexican millionaire who contacts you because he is scared than the mafia in his hometown wants to kidnap him when he returns to his country. He explains that he is in Canada and made a refugee claim as soon as he found out that he was going to be kidnaped upon his return to Mexico. Unfortunately, his refugee claim a refugee appeal were both denied by IRB. As such, he was issued a removal order but just as he was getting ready to go back to Mexico, he got into flight at a bar and was arrested. He was sentenced to 2 years in prison and would like to know if his removal order is still upheld.

a) He could still appeal the RAD decision

b) The removal order would be stayed

c) They will deport him immediately rather than send him to jail

d) The authorities will let him out of prison as soon as his departure order expires in order to deport him

7. Whit respect to Immigration Division (ID), which of the following statements is true?

a) Admissibility hearing as the ID are non-adversarial

b) The minister Counsel is a public servant who works for the immigration and refugee board with the tittle of hearing officer.

c) Chairperson guidelines, policy notes, and ID rules are not binding, but they are important policy instruments that help navigate through the ID processes

d) Proceedings at the ID can be held via videoconference

8. Mathew is a permanent resident of Canada. He arrived at the Peace Arch border crossing from United States after being in the United States for over 3 years. While in the united states, Mathew was convicted of possession of illegal drugs for the purpose of trafficking. He was sentenced and spent one year in united states jail. Mathew is about to be examined by a CBSA officer at the border. What is the likely outcome of Matthew's examination interview at the border.

a) Because Matthew is inadmissible to Canada, the CBSA officer would revoke his permanent resident status ath the border. Subsequently, Matthew would be deported back to the united states.

b) Matthew would be alleged to be inadmissible by the CBSA officer, who would initiate an inadmissibility report based on Matthew's conviction in the united states and direct that a hearing be held at the immigration division.

c) Matthew would not be found to be inadmissible, because he has already served his jail sentence in the united states. therefore, the CBSA officer cannot have him punished for the same conviction by initiating and inadmissibility report against him

d) Matthew would not be inadmissible because he has served his sentence and is deemed rehabilited