Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

                                                                                                                                             Date: 20010816

                                                                                                                                 Docket: IMM-4968-00

Ottawa, Ontario, the 16th day of August, 2001

Present: The Honourable Mr. Justice Pinard

Between

BAKSHISH SINGH DHOT

Applicant

- and -

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

AND IMMIGRATION

Respondent

ORDER

The application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Division rendered on August 9, 2000, ruling that the applicant is not a Convention refugee, is dismissed.

                        J.

Certified true translation

Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L., Trad. a.


Date: 20010816

                                      Docket: IMM-4968-00

Neutral Citation: 2001 FCT 881

Between

BAKSHISH SINGH DHOT

Applicant

- and -

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

AND IMMIGRATION

Respondent

REASONS FOR ORDER

PINARD J.:

[1]         This is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Division rendered August 9, 2000, ruling that the applicant is not a Convention refugee as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Immigration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-2.

[2]         The applicant, 35 years of age, is a citizen of India. He cites a well-founded fear of persecution because of an alleged political opinion.

[3]         The Refugee Division dismissed the applicant's claim because it thought the major items in his claim were not credible.


[4]         The applicant's counsel literally cites the poor quality of the translation during the hearing before the Refugee Division in calling for a new hearing before that tribunal.

[5]         First, the evidence pertaining to the quality of the translation before the Refugee Division is rather weak. It is limited to the affidavit of the applicant, who cites only one or two possible errors in translation and very generally alleges that he had some difficulty during the hearing in understanding the translator.

[6]         Even supposing that the translation was inadequate, of which I am far from satisfied, it is clear that the applicant could and should have complained at the time of the hearing before the Refugee Division. He raised this grievance for the first time only in his memorandum in support of his application for leave in this case, and I must conclude that the applicant had waived his rights under section 14 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as the Federal Court of Appeal recently held in a similar matter, Mohammadian v. Canada (M.C.I.), 2001 F.C.A. 191, [2001] F.C.J. no. 916 (QL).

[7]         Accordingly, the application for judicial review is dismissed.

                                     J.

OTTAWA, ONTARIO

August 16, 2001

Certified true translation

Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L., Trad. a.


FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

TRIAL DIVISION

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET NO:                          IMM-4968-00

STYLE:                                       BAKSHISH SINGH DHOT v. MCI

PLACE OF HEARING:            Montréal, Quebec

DATE OF HEARING: July 11, 2001

REASONS FOR ORDER OF PINARD J.

DATED:                                     AUGUST 16, 2001

APPEARANCES:

MANUEL CENTURION                                                FOR THE APPLICANT

ISABELLE BROCHU                                        FOR THE RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

MANUEL CENTURION

MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC                                                 FOR THE APPLICANT

MORRIS ROSENBERG

DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL

OF CANADA                                                     FOR THE RESPONDENT

 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.