Federal Court


Citizenhip judge could not blend together three methods for determining citizenship

This was appeal of citizenship judge’s decision. Citizenship officer prepared document that described contradictions, irregularities and omissions in citizenship applicants’ record. Case was referred to citizenship judge to determine whether applicants were eligible for citizenship under s. 5(1)(c) of Citizenship Act (Can.), and citizenship judge found they were. Appeal allowed. Citizenship judge’s decision was not adequately reasoned to enable it to be understood where he took numbers or how he calculated numbers. Decision was incomprehensible so error of law was committed. Citizenship judge could chose between three methods for determining citizenship, but he could not blend three together. Due to omissions, contradictions and implausibilities, citizenship judge’s analysis was not reasonable or correct.

Canada (Ministre de la Citoyenneté et de l’Immigration) c. Salameh (Jan. 24, 2013, F.C., Michel M.J. Shore J., File No. T-167-12) 231 A.C.W.S. (3d) 40

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Lawyers have expressed concerns that of 38 justices of the peace the province appointed this summer, only 12 have law degrees. Do you think this is an issue?