Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20020723

Docket: IMM-5904-01

Neutral Citation: 2002 FCT 817

BETWEEN:

                                              Xiao Bao WEI

                                                                                                     Applicant

                                                    - and -

                          THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

                                      AND IMMIGRATION

                                                                                                 Respondent

                     REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER

CAMPBELL J.

[1]    This is an application for judicial review of the decision of the Convention Refugee Determination Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (the "CRDD"), dated November 23, 2001, wherein the Applicant was determined not to be a Convention refugee.

[2]    The Applicant is a citizen of the People's Republic of China who is a native speaker of Mandarin. Accordingly, the refugee hearing was conducted with the aid of an interpreter.


[3]    In Mohammadian v. M.C.I., 2001 F.C.A. 191, the Federal Court of Appeal held that s.14 of the Charter applies to proceedings before the CRDD. The following principles were outlined by the Court:

a. The interpretation provided to the refugee claimant must be continuous, precise, competent, impartial and contemporaneous;

b. The refugee claimant need not show that he has suffered actual prejudice as a result of a breach of the standard of interpretation before the Court can interfere with the CRDD's decision; and,

c. Complaints about the quality of interpretation must be made at the first opportunity, that is, before the CRDD.

  

[4]    In the present case, through his counsel early on in the course of the hearing, the Applicant made an objection to the quality of the interpretation. In my opinion, this objection was dismissed without due consideration.

[5]    I am satisfied on the evidence produced in support of the present application that there is a strong likelihood that the Applicant's evidence was not fairly and accurately adduced before the CRDD because of the unheeded objection.

[6]    On the evidence provided, I find that the interpretation provided in the present case did not meet the standard outlined in Mohammadian, supra. As a result, the CRDD's decision was made in reviewable error.


                                                O R D E R

Accordingly, the CRDD's decision is set aside and the matter is referred back to a different panel for redetermination.

(Sgd.) "Douglas R. Campbell"

Judge

Vancouver, B.C.

July 23, 2002

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the above document

is a true copy of the original filed of record

in the Registry of the Federal Court of Canada

on the _______ day of ___________ A.D. 20 ____

Dated this _______ day of ____________ 20 ____

________________________________________

Anita Merai-Schwartz, Registry Officer


                          FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

                                       TRIAL DIVISION

    NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

    

DOCKET:                   IMM-5904-01

STYLE OF CAUSE: XIAO BAO WEI

Applicant

- and -

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

AND IMMIGRATION

Respondent

                                                         

PLACE OF HEARING:                                   Vancouver, B.C.

DATE OF HEARING:                                     July 23, 2002

REASONS FOR ORDER:                              CAMPBELL J.

DATED:                      July 23, 2002

   

APPEARANCES:

Antya Schrack                                                     for Applicant

Banafsheh Sokhansanj                                        for Respondent

  

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Antya Schrack                                                    for Applicant

Vancouver, B.C.

Morris Rosenberg                                                 for Respondent

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.