Law360 Canada (September 27, 2023, 3:10 PM EDT) -- Appeals by foreign nationals from judgments of the Federal Court of Appeal that set aside decisions allowing applications for judicial review of a decision of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada. The Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada ruled in separate administrative decisions that two foreign nationals could be found inadmissible under s. 34(1)(e) if their alleged violent conduct were established. One foreign national had allegedly shot a gun and wounded two people when he was assaulted during a fight at a bar, while the other allegedly committed acts of violence against two intimate partners. It was not alleged that either foreign national had engaged in acts of violence with a link to national security or the security of Canada. The Federal Court of Appeal ruled that the IAD and Immigration Division had reasonably interpreted s. 34(1)(e) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), S.C. 2001, c. 27, as not requiring a nexus to national security or the security of Canada. Two issues arose. First, what standard of review should the reviewing courts have applied when reviewing the decisions of the IAD in the foreign nationals’ cases? Second, how should that standard of review have been applied in the circumstances?...