Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content


Date: 19980505


Docket: IMM-1517-98

MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC, THE 5th DAY OF MAY 1998

Present:      RICHARD MORNEAU, PROTHONOTARY

Between:

     VILMA VILUS

     Applicant

     AND

     MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

     AND IMMIGRATION

     Respondent

     ORDER

     The applicant may serve his record and file it with this Court pursuant to Rule 10(2) of the Federal Court Immigration Rules, 1993, together with the returns of service thereof on the parties, within three (3) days of the date of this order;

     The respondent"s time limit for filing and serving its memorandum of argument will commence as of the date of service of the applicant"s record.

     The applicant"s motion is otherwise dismissed.

Richard Morneau

     Prothonotary

Certified true translation

M. Iveson


Date: 19980505


Docket: IMM-1517-98

Between:

     VILMA VILUS

     Applicant

     AND

     MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

     AND IMMIGRATION

     Respondent

     REASONS FOR ORDER

RICHARD MORNEAU, PROTHONOTARY:

[1]      This is a motion by the applicant for leave to amend his application for leave to commence an application for judicial review (the application).

Facts

[2]      On May 26, 1997, the applicant applied to the respondent for permanent residence as the spouse of a Canadian citizen.

[3]      On February 19, 1998, the applicant was advised that his application for a ministerial exemption could not be granted and that a report had been issued against him pursuant to section 27 of the Immigration Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-2 (the Act), because he had failed to comply with the Act.

[4]      After this report was issued, a departure order was made against the applicant on March 5, 1998 (the March 5 decision).

[5]      On March 18, 1998, the applicant submitted a claim for Convention refugee status to the respondent.

[6]      On March 27, 1998, the applicant was notified pursuant to subsection 44(1) of the Act that he was not eligible to have his refugee claim determined because a departure order had previously been made against him (the March 27 decision).

[7]      On April 3, 1998, the applicant commenced his application for judicial review of the March 27 decision.

[8]      Through the instant motion, according to the explanations given to the Court by his counsel, the applicant now seeks to have the March 5 decision too set aside by means of his application.

Analysis

[9]      Even though it is very much in the applicant"s interest to have the March 5 decision set aside in order to succeed in his application, the fact remains that the March 5 decision is distinct and separate from the one referred to in the application.

[10]      It was the applicant"s responsibility to commence an application for judicial review of the March 5 decision, and it seems that this would still be possible with leave of the Court.

[11]      In my view, it would be incongruous to allow the applicant to challenge this decision now when he has not previously sought such a remedy. The affidavit filed in support of his motion is silent as to why the March 5 decision has not yet been challenged in a separate application for judicial review. There is accordingly no reason to apply the opening clause of Rule 302 of the Federal Court Rules (1998) in the instant case.

[12]      This motion will accordingly be dismissed.

[13]      The applicant will have a very short time during which to serve and file his record under Rule 10 of the Federal Court Immigration Rules, 1993.

Richard Morneau

     Prothonotary

MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC

May 5, 1998

Certified true translation

M. Iveson

Court No. IMM-1517-98         

BETWEEN

     VILMA VILUS

     Applicant

     - and -

     MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

     Respondent

     REASONS FOR ORDER

     FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

     NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

COURT FILE NO.:

STYLE OF CAUSE:

IMM-1517-98

VILMA VILUS

     Applicant

AND

MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND

IMMIGRATION

     Respondent

PLACE OF HEARING:Montréal, Quebec

DATE OF HEARING:May 4, 1998

REASONS FOR ORDER BY RICHARD MORNEAU, PROTHONOTARY

DATE OF REASONS FOR ORDER:May 5, 1998

APPEARANCES:

Jean Ernest Pierre for the applicant

Josée Paquin for the respondent

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Jean Ernest Pierre for the applicant

Montréal, Quebec

George Thomsonfor the respondent

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Ottawa, Ontario


 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.