Figurado v. Canada (Solicitor General)

Figurado v. Canada (Solicitor General)
Court (s) Database
Federal Court Decisions
Date
2004-02-16
Neutral citation
2004 FC 241
File numbers
IMM-1070-04
Decision Content
Date: 20040216
Docket: IMM-1070-04
Citation: 2004 FC 241
Toronto, Ontario, February 16th, 2004
Present: The Honourable Mr. Justice von Finckenstein
BETWEEN:
FRANCIS SEBAMALAI FIGURADO
Applicant
and
THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
(Delivered orally from the bench and written subsequently
for precision and clarification)
[1] This stay application arises from a negative Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA) dated December 9th, 2003.
[2] To succeed in a stay application, an applicant must satisfy each element of the test set out in Toth v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration) (1988), 86 N.R.302 (F.C.A.).
[3] Before this Court, the Applicant argued that there were serious issues to be tried, namely that the PRRA Officer:
a) did not properly assess the risk faced by the Applicant at the hands of the LTTE but rather assessed only the risk generally faced by Tamil returnees; and
b) erred in law by finding that there was state protection available to the Applicant in Sri Lanka.
[4] A close reading of the PRRA Officer's decision reveals that neither of these allegations is supportable. The PRRA Officer, on the basis of the evidence submitted to her, addressed the risks faced by the Applicant (pages 9 and 11 of the Applicant's Record) as well as the state protection available in Sri Lanka (page 11 of the Applicant's Record).
[5] The evidence before the PRRA Officer was quite sufficient to support her findings.
[6] What the Applicant really asks for under the rubric of "serious issue" is a re-weighing of the evidence before the PRRA Officer.
[7] Such a request does not satisfy the requirement of "serious issue" under Toth, supra. See Thangasivan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), Court File IMM-986-03, 23 November, 2003 (unreported).
[8] Accordingly, this request for a stay is denied.
ORDER
THIS COURT ORDERS that the motion for a stay of the execution of the removal order is dismissed.
"K. von Finckenstein"
J.F.C.
FEDERAL COURT
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-1070-04
STYLE OF CAUSE: FRANCIS SEBAMALAI FIGURADO
Applicant
and
THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR CANADA
Respondent
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
DATE OF HEARING: FEBRUARY 16, 2004
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER BY : von FINCKENSTEIN J.
DATED: FEBRUARY 16, 2004
APPEARANCES:
Ms. Brena Parnes
FOR APPLICANT
Ms. Mielka Visnic
FOR RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Waldman & Associates
Toronto, Ontario
FOR APPLICANT
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
FOR RESPONDENT
FEDERAL COURT
TRIAL DIVISION
Date: 20040216
Docket: IMM-1070-04
BETWEEN:
FRANCIS SEBAMALAI FIGURADO
Applicant
and
THE SOLICITOR GENERAL FOR CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER