---
type: "firecrawl-provider"
description: "Decisions of the Federal Court of Canada from the Court's own decisions site (decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca, run by Lexum): full-text search, decisions by year, citation and file number lookup, and each decision's metadata and full text in English or French."
use_when: "Decisions of the Federal Court of Canada from the Court's own decisions site (decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca, run by Lexum): full-text search, decisions by year, citation and file number lookup, and each decision's metadata and full text in English or French."
categories: "Public records"
capabilities: 4
credits_per_call: 5
---
# Federal Court of Canada Decisions on Firecrawl Alexandria

Decisions of the Federal Court of Canada from the Court's own decisions site (decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca, run by Lexum): full-text search, decisions by year, citation and file number lookup, and each decision's metadata and full text in English or French.

- Categories: Public records
- Category index: [Public records category](https://firecrawl.dev/alexandria/agents/categories/public-records)
- Provider key: `decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca`
- Access: Firecrawl credits
- Cost: 5 credits per call

## More

- [Human guide](https://firecrawl.dev/app/alexandria/decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca)
- [OpenAPI spec](https://firecrawl.dev/alexandria/agents/providers/decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca/openapi.json)

## Capabilities

- [Get decision](https://firecrawl.dev/alexandria/agents/providers/decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca/court-cases/get_decision): One Federal Court of Canada decision by item id or decision URL: style of cause, decision date, neutral or report citation, court file numbers, the site's notes (corrections, link to the reported version), the PDF link, and the full text of the decision as published by the Court (cover page, reasons, judgment and the counsel page), in pages of up to max_chars characters. The Court publishes no editorial headnote here, so nothing is left out.
- [List decisions](https://firecrawl.dev/alexandria/agents/providers/decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca/court-cases/list_decisions): Federal Court of Canada decisions released in one calendar year, newest first, 25 per page with the year's total: item id, style of cause, neutral or report citation, decision date, page and PDF URLs.
- [Resolve citation](https://firecrawl.dev/alexandria/agents/providers/decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca/court-cases/resolve_citation): Find the Federal Court of Canada decision for a neutral citation ('2026 FC 1296', French '2026 CF 1296'), a Federal Courts Reports citation or a court file number ('IMM-10290-25', 'T-784-18'). A neutral citation returns only the exact decision; a file number returns every decision filed under it.
- [Search decisions](https://firecrawl.dev/alexandria/agents/providers/decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca/court-cases/search_decisions): Full-text search of Federal Court of Canada decisions on the Court's own decisions site (decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca), optionally limited to a decision-date range and sorted by relevance or date. Returns 25 decisions per page with the total hit count: item id, style of cause, neutral or report citation, decision date, a hit excerpt, page and PDF URLs.

## 1. Choose this provider when

Decisions of the Federal Court of Canada from the Court's own decisions site (decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca, run by Lexum): full-text search, decisions by year, citation and file number lookup, and each decision's metadata and full text in English or French.

## 2. Minimal request

Call `POST https://api.firecrawl.dev/v2/scrape` with `{ alexandria: { provider, capability, options } }`. For a batch, send `{ alexandria: [...] }` with up to 10 calls.

```json
{
  "provider": "decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca",
  "capability": "court-cases/get_decision",
  "options": {
    "item_id": 58875,
    "max_chars": 1500
  }
}
```

## 3. Add provider options

Use only the options needed for the task:

- `item_id` (number): Decisia item id, from the other functions or a decision URL (/item/531684/). Example: `10`
- `language` (string): Page language: 'en' (default) or 'fr'. When the French version does not exist yet the English one is returned with a warning. Example: `en`
- `max_chars` (number): Most characters of text to return (default 30000). Example: `500`
- `offset` (number): Character offset into the decision text (default 0); use the continuation cursor. Example: `10`
- `url` (string): A decision URL instead of item_id, e.g. https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/531684/index.do (decisions.fct-cf.ca links work too). Its language is used unless language is set. Example: `<url>`

## 4. Request through your preferred interface

### JavaScript

```javascript
const result = await firecrawl.scrape({
  alexandria: {
    provider: "decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca",
    capability: "court-cases/get_decision",
    options: {
      item_id: 58875,
      max_chars: 1500,
    },
  },
});
```

### Python

```python
result = firecrawl.scrape_alexandria({
  "provider": "decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca",
  "capability": "court-cases/get_decision",
  "options": {
    "item_id": 58875,
    "max_chars": 1500
  }
})
```

### cURL

```sh
curl https://api.firecrawl.dev/v2/scrape \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer $FIRECRAWL_API_KEY" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{
  "alexandria": {
    "provider": "decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca",
    "capability": "court-cases/get_decision",
    "options": {
      "item_id": 58875,
      "max_chars": 1500
    }
  }
}'
```

### CLI

```sh
firecrawl scrape 'decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca/court-cases/get_decision' \
  --options '{"item_id":58875,"max_chars":1500}'
```


### MCP

Call the FCX MCP retrieve tool with this object:

```json
{
  "provider": "decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca",
  "capability": "court-cases/get_decision",
  "options": {
    "item_id": 58875,
    "max_chars": 1500
  }
}
```

Ask for only the returned fields needed by the task.

## 5. Full request shape

```json
{
  "provider": "decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca",
  "capability": "court-cases/get_decision",
  "options": {
    "item_id": 58875,
    "max_chars": 1500
  }
}
```

## 6. Response data

The response includes `success`, `provider`, `capability`, `creditsCost` and `data`. This example shows the provider payload in `data`:

```json
{
  "collection": "Federal Court Decisions",
  "decision_date": "2010-12-31",
  "file_numbers": [
    "IMM-7207-10"
  ],
  "item_id": 58875,
  "language": "en",
  "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1339",
  "notes": null,
  "observed_at_ms": 1792979098377,
  "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58875/1/document.do",
  "report_citation": null,
  "reported_version_url": null,
  "source_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58875/index.do",
  "text": "Federal Court\nCour fédérale\nDate: 20101231\nDocket: IMM-7207-10\nCitation: 2010 FC 1339\nOttawa\n,\nOntario\n, December 31, 2010\nPRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Lemieux\nBETWEEN:\nTHE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION\nApplicant\nand\nB236\nRespondent\nREASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER\nI. Introduction\n[1]\nThe Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (the Minister) moves the Court for an interlocutory injunction to prevent the release from detention of B236 (the Respondent), a citizen of Sri Lanka who was one of the 492 persons aboard the MV Sun Sea which arrived in Canadian water without authorization on August 13, 2010; he has been detained ever since while his identity had not been established. He was ordered released from detention with conditions by order of a member of the Immigration Division (I.D.) after the conclusion of a fourth 30 day detention review held on December 7, 2010.\n[2]\nAt that hearing, Counsel for the Minister indicated the Minister was satisfied who the Respondent was but urged his continued detention on two new grounds: (1) under section 58(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, (2001, C.27) (the IRPA), that he was a danger to the public and (2) under section 58(1)(b) that he was a flight risk. These two paragraphs reads:\nRelease — Immigration Division\n58. (1) The Immigration Division shall order the release of a permanent resident or a foreign national unless it is satisfied, taking into account prescribed factors, that\n(a) they are a danger to th",
  "text_offset": 0,
  "text_total_chars": 36361,
  "title": "Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v. B236"
}
```

## API reference-derived contract

The following capability contract is generated from the same normalized Alexandria API reference exposed in the API spec.

### Get decision

- Capability: `court-cases/get_decision`
- Description: One Federal Court of Canada decision by item id or decision URL: style of cause, decision date, neutral or report citation, court file numbers, the site's notes (corrections, link to the reported version), the PDF link, and the full text of the decision as published by the Court (cover page, reasons, judgment and the counsel page), in pages of up to max_chars characters. The Court publishes no editorial headnote here, so nothing is left out.
- Instructions: Read what the Court held and why, quote a paragraph, or get a decision's citation, file numbers and judge. Get the item id from search_decisions, list_decisions or resolve_citation, or pass a decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca URL. For long decisions, call again with offset set to the continuation cursor.
- Cost: 5 credits per call
- Capability file: [Get decision](https://firecrawl.dev/alexandria/agents/providers/decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca/court-cases/get_decision)

Accepted options:
- `item_id` (number): Decisia item id, from the other functions or a decision URL (/item/531684/). Example: `10`
- `language` (string): Page language: 'en' (default) or 'fr'. When the French version does not exist yet the English one is returned with a warning. Example: `en`
- `max_chars` (number): Most characters of text to return (default 30000). Example: `500`
- `offset` (number): Character offset into the decision text (default 0); use the continuation cursor. Example: `10`
- `url` (string): A decision URL instead of item_id, e.g. https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/531684/index.do (decisions.fct-cf.ca links work too). Its language is used unless language is set. Example: `<url>`

Response schema example:
```json
{
  "collection": "Federal Court Decisions",
  "decision_date": "2010-12-31",
  "file_numbers": [
    "IMM-7207-10"
  ],
  "item_id": 58875,
  "language": "en",
  "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1339",
  "notes": null,
  "observed_at_ms": 1792979098377,
  "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58875/1/document.do",
  "report_citation": null,
  "reported_version_url": null,
  "source_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58875/index.do",
  "text": "Federal Court\nCour fédérale\nDate: 20101231\nDocket: IMM-7207-10\nCitation: 2010 FC 1339\nOttawa\n,\nOntario\n, December 31, 2010\nPRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Lemieux\nBETWEEN:\nTHE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION\nApplicant\nand\nB236\nRespondent\nREASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER\nI. Introduction\n[1]\nThe Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (the Minister) moves the Court for an interlocutory injunction to prevent the release from detention of B236 (the Respondent), a citizen of Sri Lanka who was one of the 492 persons aboard the MV Sun Sea which arrived in Canadian water without authorization on August 13, 2010; he has been detained ever since while his identity had not been established. He was ordered released from detention with conditions by order of a member of the Immigration Division (I.D.) after the conclusion of a fourth 30 day detention review held on December 7, 2010.\n[2]\nAt that hearing, Counsel for the Minister indicated the Minister was satisfied who the Respondent was but urged his continued detention on two new grounds: (1) under section 58(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, (2001, C.27) (the IRPA), that he was a danger to the public and (2) under section 58(1)(b) that he was a flight risk. These two paragraphs reads:\nRelease — Immigration Division\n58. (1) The Immigration Division shall order the release of a permanent resident or a foreign national unless it is satisfied, taking into account prescribed factors, that\n(a) they are a danger to th",
  "text_offset": 0,
  "text_total_chars": 36361,
  "title": "Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v. B236"
}
```

### List decisions

- Capability: `court-cases/list_decisions`
- Description: Federal Court of Canada decisions released in one calendar year, newest first, 25 per page with the year's total: item id, style of cause, neutral or report citation, decision date, page and PDF URLs.
- Instructions: See what the Federal Court decided in a given year or browse the latest decisions (pass the current year). The collection starts in 1972 and is complete from 2001; earlier years hold only a few decisions.
- Cost: 5 credits per call
- Capability file: [List decisions](https://firecrawl.dev/alexandria/agents/providers/decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca/court-cases/list_decisions)

Accepted options:
- `language` (string): Page language: 'en' (default) or 'fr'. Recent decisions often exist only in English until the Court publishes the French version. Example: `en`
- `page` (number): Result page, 25 per page (default 1); the next page number is the continuation cursor. Example: `10`
- `year` (number, required): Decision year, e.g. 2026. Example: `1972`

Response schema example:
```json
{
  "language": "en",
  "observed_at_ms": 1792979098186,
  "page": 1,
  "results": [
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-31",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58875,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1339",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58875/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v. B236",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58875/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-31",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 59397,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1341",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/59397/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Castorena Garcia v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/59397/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-31",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58869,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1338",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58869/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Ched v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58869/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-31",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58855,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1340",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58855/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Khodabakhsh v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58855/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-30",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 59275,
      "neutral_citation": null,
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/59275/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Canada v. World Tamil Movement of Quebec",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/59275/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-30",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 59080,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1337",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/59080/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Douze v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/59080/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-24",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58860,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1328",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58860/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Eurocopter v. Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limitée",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58860/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-24",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58854,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1334",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58854/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Rodriguez Coronado v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58854/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-24",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58861,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1333",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58861/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Yachimec v. Canada (National Revenue)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58861/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-23",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58873,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1332",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58873/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "A.B. v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58873/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-23",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58864,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1331",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58864/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Acreman v. Canada (Attorney General)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58864/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-23",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58862,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1330",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58862/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Canada (Attorney General) v. United States Steel Corporation",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58862/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-23",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58858,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1327",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58858/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Charky v. Canada (Attorney General)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58858/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-23",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 59083,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1325",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/59083/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Conseil des montagnais de Natashquan v. Malec",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/59083/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-23",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 59036,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1323",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/59036/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Hernandez Hernandez v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/59036/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-23",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 59038,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1326",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/59038/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Sugiarto v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/59038/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-22",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58863,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1264",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58863/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Apotex Inc. v. Merck Frosst Canada Ltd.",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58863/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-22",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58853,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1321",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58853/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Banful v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58853/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-22",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58852,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1318",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58852/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Calogeras & Master Supplies Inc. v. Ceres Hellenic Shipping Enterprises Ltd.",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58852/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-22",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58892,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1322",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58892/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Dunkova v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58892/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-22",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58848,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1320",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58848/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Hernandez Gutierrez v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58848/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-22",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58865,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1265",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58865/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Merck & Co Inc. v. Apotex Inc.",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58865/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-22",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58871,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1324",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58871/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Murati v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58871/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-22",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58849,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1316",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58849/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Ymeri v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58849/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2010-12-22",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 58847,
      "neutral_citation": "2010 FC 1319",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/58847/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Zupko v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/58847/index.do"
    }
  ],
  "source_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/2010/nav_date.do",
  "total": 1295,
  "year": 2010
}
```

### Resolve citation

- Capability: `court-cases/resolve_citation`
- Description: Find the Federal Court of Canada decision for a neutral citation ('2026 FC 1296', French '2026 CF 1296'), a Federal Courts Reports citation or a court file number ('IMM-10290-25', 'T-784-18'). A neutral citation returns only the exact decision; a file number returns every decision filed under it.
- Instructions: Turn a citation or docket number from a brief, an article or another judgment into an item id, then read the decision with get_decision.
- Cost: 5 credits per call
- Capability file: [Resolve citation](https://firecrawl.dev/alexandria/agents/providers/decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca/court-cases/resolve_citation)

Accepted options:
- `citation` (string, required): Neutral citation, report citation or file number. Example: `<citation>`
- `language` (string): Page language: 'en' (default) or 'fr'. Recent decisions often exist only in English until the Court publishes the French version. Example: `en`

Response schema example:
```json
{
  "citation": "2026 FC 1296",
  "count": 1,
  "language": "en",
  "matches": [
    {
      "decision_date": "2026-10-23",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 531684,
      "neutral_citation": "2026 FC 1296",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/531684/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": null,
      "title": "Kidane v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/531684/index.do"
    }
  ],
  "observed_at_ms": 1792979098201,
  "source_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/en/d/s/index.do?cont=&ref=2026+FC+1296&d1=&d2=&p=&col=54&su=&or="
}
```

### Search decisions

- Capability: `court-cases/search_decisions`
- Description: Full-text search of Federal Court of Canada decisions on the Court's own decisions site (decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca), optionally limited to a decision-date range and sorted by relevance or date. Returns 25 decisions per page with the total hit count: item id, style of cause, neutral or report citation, decision date, a hit excerpt, page and PDF URLs.
- Instructions: Find Federal Court cases on a legal topic ('procedural fairness', 'humanitarian and compassionate', 'patent infringement') or by party name. Read one with get_decision. To look up a known citation or file number use resolve_citation.
- Cost: 5 credits per call
- Capability file: [Search decisions](https://firecrawl.dev/alexandria/agents/providers/decisions-fct-cf-gc-ca/court-cases/search_decisions)

Accepted options:
- `date_from` (string): Earliest decision date, YYYY-MM-DD. Pattern: ^\d{4}-\d{2}-\d{2}$. Example: `<date_from>`
- `date_to` (string): Latest decision date, YYYY-MM-DD. Pattern: ^\d{4}-\d{2}-\d{2}$. Example: `<date_to>`
- `language` (string): Page language: 'en' (default) or 'fr'. Recent decisions often exist only in English until the Court publishes the French version. Example: `en`
- `page` (number): Result page, 25 per page (default 1); the next page number is the continuation cursor. Example: `10`
- `query` (string, required): Words to find in the decisions; the site's syntax applies (quotes for a phrase). Example: `<query>`
- `sort` (string): 'relevance' (default) or 'date' (newest first). Example: `relevance`

Response schema example:
```json
{
  "date_from": "2020-01-01",
  "date_to": "2020-12-31",
  "language": "en",
  "observed_at_ms": 1792979098146,
  "page": 1,
  "query": "procedural fairness",
  "results": [
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-06-03",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 490793,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 656",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/490793/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "B. Procedural fairness [41] The four different breaches of procedural fairness raised by Foster Farms can in fact be regrouped under two separate headings. [...] The actual level and content of the duty of procedural fairness, and whether a decision is procedurally fair, must therefore be determined on a case-by-case basis (Baker at para 21). [...] (5) Conclusion on procedural fairness [103] In the circumstances, and for all the reasons detailed above, I do not detect any breach of the principles of procedural fairness in the decision-making process followed by the Minister.",
      "title": "Foster Farms LLC v. Canada (International Trade Diversification)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/490793/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-12-21",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 490442,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 1173",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/490442/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "She submits that the decision was made in breach of the requirements of procedural fairness and that it is unreasonable. [6] For the reasons that follow, I agree with the applicant that the decision was made in breach of the requirements of procedural fairness. [...] [31] Often on judicial review the issue is whether a procedural fairness letter should have been sent when one was not. In the present case, however, a procedural fairness letter was sent to the applicant. [...] [34] The insufficiency of the procedural fairness letter can be demonstrated by comparing it with the officer’s GCMS notes.",
      "title": "Asanova v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/490442/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-01-30",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 460711,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 171",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/460711/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "Was the decision procedurally fair? C. Was the decision reasonable? IV. Relevant Provisions [...] B. Was the decision procedurally fair? [19] In administrative contexts, breaches of procedural fairness have been considered reviewable on a correctness standard or subject to a “reviewing exercise ... [...] [21] Though, as a matter of procedural fairness, reasons are not required for all administrative decisions, where reasons are required/provided, the starting point for the judicial review of procedural fairness and reasonableness is the articulated reasons.",
      "title": "Likhi v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/460711/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-12-21",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 490416,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 1171",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/490416/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "The second issue is a matter of procedural fairness. [6] Although using different terminology, the parties are in agreement on the standard of review applicable to issues of procedural fairness. [...] [7] I am partial to the terminology espoused by the Minister, which recognizes that no standard of review is applicable to procedural fairness issues. Effectively, the Court applies a “fairness” standard, in which it assesses whether the requirements of procedural fairness have been met. [...] In my view, the case law establishes that procedural fairness issues are not reviewed on the reasonableness standard, even where they involve application of statutory procedural requirements.",
      "title": "Perez v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/490416/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-03-10",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 483421,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 355",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/483421/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "[4] The Applicant was sent a procedural fairness letter dated February 12, 2019, informing him that the Officer was concerned the IELTS that the Applicant submitted was fraudulent. [...] In a February 12, 2019, entry the Officer noted that following a “QA” it was discovered that the IELTS results were fraudulent and that a procedural fairness letter was therefore sent to the Applicant. An entry made on May 13, 2019 states that in his response to the procedural fairness letter the Applicant “stated that he [...] Did the Officer breach the duty of procedural fairness owed to the Applicant? ii. Was the Officer’s decision reasonable?",
      "title": "Albrifcani v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/483421/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-10-14",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 487364,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 965",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/487364/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "Mr. Tiben and the Dependant Applicants also claim that the Officer breached their right to procedural fairness because she did not give them an opportunity to respond to her credibility concerns and wrote her procedural fairness letter in French. [...] B. The procedural fairness concerns [28] Turning to procedural fairness, Mr. Tiben and the Dependant Applicants submit that the Officer breached their right to a fair process because she did not give them an opportunity to respond to her credibility concerns. [...] They also suggest that, when family unification is at stake, an officer owes a higher duty of procedural fairness than in applications in which it is not. They further complain about the procedural fairness letter having been written in French.",
      "title": "Tiben v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/487364/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-04-07",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 469813,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 495",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/469813/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "[24] In my view, the procedural fairness argument is dispositive of this application, and therefore I find that there is only one issue: [...] the “requirements of the duty of procedural fairness in a given case...will impact how a court conducts reasonableness review.” In my view, this is instructive for a reviewing court to first determine whether a duty of procedural fairness exists, and in light of the procedural fairness requirements (if applicable), apply [...] [35] In my view, the Officer breached procedural fairness, and I find this Court’s decision in Hamza to be particularly helpful.",
      "title": "Patil v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/469813/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-09-28",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 487081,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 935",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/487081/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "Did the Officer breach the duty of procedural fairness? B. Was the Officer’s decision to refuse the work permit reasonable? [...] [7] The presumptive standard of reasonableness does not apply to questions of procedural fairness: Vavilov at paras 23 and 77. The parties’ submissions on the appropriate standard of review for procedural fairness can be summarized as follows. [...] [19] While an applicant who applies for a work permit can expect procedural fairness, the degree of procedural fairness falls at the low end of the spectrum: Anenih at para 15; Kindie v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2011 FC 850 at para 5.",
      "title": "Kumar v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/487081/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-08-05",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 483531,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 815",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/483531/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "Did the Officer breach procedural fairness by failing to inform the Applicant of the case to be met? [...] A. Did the Officer breach procedural fairness by failing to inform the Applicant of the case to be met? [...] [19] Although the duty of procedural fairness on a TRV application is generally at the low end of the spectrum, a finding of inadmissibility requires a high degree of procedural fairness on the part of the officer (Mehreen at para 24).",
      "title": "Brefo v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/483531/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-11-23",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 489175,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 1084",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/489175/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "[6] The parties disagree on the appropriate standard of review for procedural fairness. Ms. Kita submits that Vavilov did not change the standard of review for issues of procedural fairness, which remain reviewable on a standard of correctness. [...] The central question is whether the procedure was fair. [7] I agree with Ms. Kita that the presumptive standard of reasonableness does not apply to questions of procedural fairness: Vavilov at paras 23 and 77. [...] B. Issue 2: Did the Officer breach procedural fairness? [34] The procedural fairness question here is whether the Officer was required to send a fairness letter providing Ms. Kita an opportunity to respond to concerns before deciding to refuse the applications.",
      "title": "Kita v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/489175/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-01-10",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 459509,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 26",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/459509/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "Rather, he challenges the procedural fairness of the process that resulted in his hearing date not being rescheduled as he had requested. [...] [27] The Federal Court of Appeal has recently further clarified that there is no standard of review for issues of procedural fairness. What is fair in any particular circumstance is highly variable and contextual. [...] However, this respect for an agency’s procedural choices coexists with an inquiry into whether the procedure followed by the decision-maker is fair in the circumstances of the case.",
      "title": "Trboljevac v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/459509/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-08-04",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 483303,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 809",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/483303/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "The GCMS notes simply indicate that on June 28, 2019, a procedural fairness letter was sent to the applicant’s daughter’s email address. [...] [9] The GCMS notes indicate that the procedural fairness letter was “resent” on July 25, 2019. A letter of that date is included in the record. [...] [39] Even so, procedural fairness requires that an applicant for a visa have an opportunity to participate meaningfully in the application process.",
      "title": "Kaur v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/483303/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-03-31",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 468284,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 461",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/468284/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "[8] The content of the duty of procedural fairness owed to a visa applicant who is outside Canada is at the low end of the spectrum. [...] The terms of settlement required that a new procedural fairness letter be sent to AB. [16] The new procedural fairness letter was sent to AB on August 16, 2017. [...] The summary contained in the second procedural fairness letter provided AB with the gist and sufficient details of the Officer’s concerns.",
      "title": "A.B. v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/468284/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-10-21",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 487316,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 990",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/487316/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "[21] Questions of procedural fairness and the duty to act fairly do not concern the merits or the content of a decision. [...] (2) No breach of procedural fairness [33] In this case, I am of the view that Mr. Paulo’s allegations of a breach of procedural fairness must fail because the alleged translation error was not a serious or non-trivial error that was material to the RAD’s findings on Mr. Paulo’s credibility. [...] We cannot automatically equate a translation error to a breach of procedural fairness. On the contrary, the Court’s case law, discussed earlier, states that translation errors must meet certain requirements before they can be characterized as a breach of procedural fairness.",
      "title": "Paulo v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/487316/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-01-27",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 461358,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 134",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/461358/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "It arose due to a prior decision of this Court finding a breach of procedural fairness in the original application process. This second time around, Ms. Lyu again raises procedural fairness arguments. [...] These factors fulfilled the relatively low duty of fairness. [19] I mentioned at the outset that the Supreme Court provided scant comment on procedural fairness in Vavilov. [...] While there was no breach of procedural fairness, this Decision is unreasonable, falling short in coherence and justifiability on the facts.",
      "title": "Lyu v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/461358/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-04-01",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 468350,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 467",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/468350/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "[32] The Applicant submits that the IAD breached procedural fairness by refusing to proceed by way of holding an oral hearing. [...] [42] In my view, the IAD did not violate procedural fairness by refusing to hold an oral hearing nor did the IAD fetter its discretion. [...] Subject to the principles of procedural fairness, the IAD is the master of its own procedure (Yiu v Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2017 FC 480 (CanLII) at para 18).",
      "title": "Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v. Keto",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/468350/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-07-02",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 481975,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 741",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/481975/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "[50] With respect to procedural fairness, the Court must apply a standard that is as close as possible to the standard of correctness; in practical terms, it must determine whether the procedure was fair in light of all the circumstances. [...] A court assessing a procedural fairness argument is required to ask whether the procedure was fair having regard to all of the circumstances, including the Baker factors. [...] [165] Ultimately, procedural fairness is not determined in a factual vacuum, and the environment and context must be taken into account.",
      "title": "Perron v. Canada (Attorney General)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/481975/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-01-31",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 460901,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 183",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/460901/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "[28] Turning to the issues of procedural fairness, the approach to be taken has not changed following Vavilov (Vavilov at para 23). [...] the process followed by the Investigator and by the Commission was entirely consistent with the applicable principles of procedural fairness. [80] Whether a decision is procedurally fair must be determined on a case-by-case basis, and the requirements of the duty of procedural fairness are eminently variable. [...] Mr. Cadostin may disagree with these conclusions, but his disagreement does not render the finding improper or reveal a breach of procedural fairness. [94] I mention one last point. In his submissions on procedural fairness issues, Mr. Cadostin referred extensively to the decision of this Court in Samatar.",
      "title": "Cadostin v. Canada (Attorney General)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/460901/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-07-28",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 483577,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 797",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/483577/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "Was the decision procedurally fair? ii. Was the decision reasonable? Standard of review [...] Issue 1: Was the decision procedurally fair? [27] The Applicants submit that the decision was procedurally unfair for three reasons: [...] In my view, this level of procedural fairness is appropriate in this circumstance. ii. Were the requirements of procedural fairness breached?",
      "title": "Lum v. Canada (Attorney General)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/483577/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-01-28",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 460440,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 151",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/460440/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "This Court noted that “[a] court assessing a procedural fairness argument is required to ask whether the procedure was fair having regard to all of the circumstances” and that “[a]ttempting to shoehorn the question of procedural fairness into a standard of review analysis is [. . .] an unprofitable exercise.” (at paragraphs [...] In assessing procedural fairness, the Court has to be satisfied that procedural fairness has been met. [...] [56] While the duty of procedural fairness at the visa application stage is low, the visa officer’s conduct constituted a breach of procedural fairness.",
      "title": "Weng v. Canada (Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/460440/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-03-24",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 466421,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 408",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/466421/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "Evaluating whether procedural fairness, or the duty of fairness, has been adhered to by a tribunal requires an assessment of the procedures and safeguards required in a particular situation (Moreau-Bérubé, para 74). [...] (2) Breach of Procedural Fairness [35] The Respondent argues that, as confirmed in Henri, at paras 21-22 and 35, procedural fairness required that the Applicant be provided with a meaningful opportunity to respond to the evidence against her and for that response to be considered. [...] C. Procedural Fairness [52] In her written submissions, the Applicant raises several grounds of procedural unfairness.",
      "title": "Omar v. Canada (Attorney General)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/466421/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-07-23",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 483840,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 774",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/483840/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "In CPR, the Federal Court of Appeal states the approach a court in a judicial review should take when determining whether a decision-maker has breached the procedural fairness obligations it has to an applicant: [54] A court assessing a procedural fairness argument is required to ask whether the procedure was fair having [...] Procedural fairness is not sacrificed on the altar of deference. [Emphasis added.] [...] The duty of procedural fairness is flexible and variable and depends on the context in which the decision is made.",
      "title": "Georges v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/483840/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-03-27",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 468872,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 426",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/468872/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "[14] Turning to the issues of procedural fairness, the approach to be taken has not changed following Vavilov (Vavilov at para 23). [...] However, the Federal Court of Appeal has recently affirmed that questions of procedural fairness are not truly decided according to any particular standard of review. [...] Furthermore, in all respects, the RAD met the procedural fairness requirements in dealing with Ms. Tsigehana’s application and I am not persuaded that the alleged errors in interpretation amounted to a breach of procedural fairness requiring the Court’s intervention.",
      "title": "Tsigehana v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/468872/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-06-16",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 482353,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 696",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/482353/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "If there was a breach of Mr. Morin’s right to procedural fairness, what is the appropriate remedy? iii. Does this Court have jurisdiction to award monetary damages in a judicial review? [...] The breach of procedural fairness is clear for the reasons set out below. Did the Election Appeal Board breach the Applicant’s right to procedural fairness? [...] [32] The concept of procedural fairness is eminently variable and its content is to be determined in the specific context and circumstances of each case (Baker at para 21).",
      "title": "Morin v. Enoch Cree First Nation",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/482353/index.do"
    },
    {
      "decision_date": "2020-07-06",
      "document_language": "en",
      "item_id": 483600,
      "neutral_citation": "2020 FC 746",
      "pdf_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/483600/1/document.do",
      "report_citation": null,
      "snippet": "The Applicant’s right to procedural fairness was not breached. (2) Fairness in ATIP [23] The Applicant also argues the Passport Division’s suggestion that he file an ATIP request breached his fairness rights, because it should have disclosed all documents. [...] [27] Similarly, in Bui, this Court held there was no breach of procedural fairness because the procedural fairness letter sent to the applicant expressed the case the applicant had to meet (at para 34). [...] IRCC did not breach the Applicant’s procedural fairness right when it declined to disclose all documents obtained during its investigation.",
      "title": "Ghahraman-Ebrahimi v. Canada (Attorney General)",
      "url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/483600/index.do"
    }
  ],
  "sort": "relevance",
  "source_url": "https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/en/d/s/index.do?cont=procedural+fairness&ref=&d1=2020-01-01&d2=2020-12-31&p=&col=54&su=&or=",
  "total": 499
}
```