Parliament can impose conditions on permanent resident’s right to remain in Canada

Immigration and Citizenship - Constitutional Issues - Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Immigration Division (ID) issued decision that applicant was inadmissible to Canada on grounds of serious criminality and organized criminality under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act . Applicant challenged provisions of Act that provided for deportation of long-term permanent residents on basis of serious or organized criminality as violating ss. 7 and/or 12 of Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms . Applicant contended that serious consequences of his deportation, namely, being uprooted from his family and life and Canada and being removed to U.K. where he had no ties, were grossly disproportionate to objective of deporting him . Applicant unsuccessfully brought application for judicial review of ID's decision . Applicant appealed. Appeal dismissed. Judge did not err in dismissing s. 7 arguments as being premature and in finding that inadmissibility determination did not engage s. 7. Section 7 of Charter could not be interpreted as requiring that assessment of person’s right be made at every step of process. Jurisprudence in immigration context was clear: section 7 rights were considered at removal or pre-removal detention stage. Parliament can impose conditions on permanent resident’s right to remain in Canada, and can legitimately remove permanent resident if they deliberately violated essential condition under which they were permitted to enter and remain in Canada. Admissibility hearing before ID was clearly not last step in that complex process and every person, including applicant, was provided with opportunity to have their Charter rights fully assessed before being removed from Canada.

Revell v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) (2019), 2019 CarswellNat 5584, 2019 FCA 262, David Stratas J.A., D.G. Near J.A., and Yves de Montigny J.A. (F.C.A.); affirmed (2017), 2017 CarswellNat 5515, 2017 CarswellNat 6318, 2017 FC 905, 2017 CF 905, Catherine M. Kane J. (F.C.).

Case Law is a weekly summary of notable civil and criminal court decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Federal Court of Canada and all Ontario courts. These cases may be found online in WestlawNext Canada. To subscribe, please visit store.thomsonreuters.ca

Free newsletter

Our newsletter is FREE and keeps you up to date on all the developments in the Ontario legal community. Please enter your email address below to subscribe.

Recent articles & video

Law Society Convocation approves new policy on bencher information requests

Relocation disputes surge in family law litigation, says Lerners LLP’s Ryan McNeil

Ont. CA confirms future harm risk not compensable in contaminated medication class action

Law Commission of Ontario announces new board of governors appointments

Ontario Superior Court upholds ‘fair dealing’ in franchise dispute

Ontario Superior Court orders retrial for catastrophic impairment case due to procedural unfairness

Most Read Articles

Relocation disputes surge in family law litigation, says Lerners LLP’s Ryan McNeil

Law Commission of Ontario announces new board of governors appointments

Ontario Superior Court denies late motion to transfer car accident case to simplified procedure

LEAF celebrates 39 years fighting gender-based discrimination at annual Evening for Equality gala