Can a decision maker such as the Immigration Officer on an application for permanent residents in Canada be reviewed on a higher standard of review of patent unreasonableness?

While counsel for the applicant acknowledged that factual findings of a decision maker such as the Officer on applications for permanent residents in Canada are reviewable on a standard of review of patent unreasonableness, she urged that determinations based upon the exercise of negative discretion or negative substituted evaluation are reviewable on a higher standard. In this regard, counsel relied on Alam v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)[2] Where my colleague, Justice Mactavish, wrote at paragraph [22] of her reasons: There is a heavier onus on a visa officer to justify the exercise of negative discretion under paragraph 11 [3][b] of the Regulations than there is with respect to the exercise of, or refusal to exercise a positive discretion under paragraph 11 [3] [a]; Justice Mactavish’s references to subsection 11 [3] of the Regulations is to that subsection of the Regulations under the former Immigration Act. Nothing turns on the distinction between that sub-section and subsection 76 [3] of the Regulations under the Immigration and Refugee and Protection Act.