Federal Court


Immigration

EXCLUSION AND EXPULSION
Failure to disclose extrinsic evidence was breach of procedural fairness

Applicant sought judicial review of officer’s decision. Applicant came to Canada in 1967 as permanent resident, along with family. He was ten years old and had resided in Canada since then. Applicant had serious mental health issues. Applicant was convicted of assault with weapon. Applicant was found inadmissible. Two-year conditional stay of deportation order was issued. Stay of removal order was cancelled. Applicant was arrested and detained. Applicant requested deferral of removal, which officer refused. Application granted. Officer relied on extrinsic evidence without giving applicant opportunity to respond. Extrinsic evidence was not generally available to public. Failure to disclose extrinsic evidence was breach of procedural fairness. There was omission of material from certified tribunal record. Missing information was highly relevant and material. Officer failed to appreciate personal circumstances of applicant, critical factor of his mental illness that led to criminal charge and loss of stay of deportation. Officer failed to appreciate evidence before him. Officer’s conclusions respecting humanitarian and compassionate considerations relevant to applicant were not reasonable. Officer’s decision was not reasonable.

Russo v. Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) (Apr. 22, 2013, F.C., E. Heneghan J., File No. IMM-2983-12) 228 A.C.W.S. (3d) 206.

cover image

DIGITAL EDITION

Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll


An Ontario lawyer says that solicitor-client privilege may be threatened by a master’s decision that barred him from representing his own firm in a dispute over a wrongful dismissal claim. Do you agree with the lawyer's assessment?
RESULTS ❯