Zhao v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
Court headnote
Zhao v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2004-02-11 Neutral citation 2004 FC 222 File numbers IMM-1685-03 Decision Content Date: 20040211 Docket: IMM-1685-03 Citation: 2004 FC 222 Toronto, Ontario, February 11th, 2004 Present: The Honourable Mr. Justice Campbell BETWEEN: JINHUA ZHAO Applicant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER [1] In the present case, the Applicant claims refugee protection on the basis of persecution on the ground of religious in the People's Republic of China. [2] The hearing before the IRB was concluded on February 14, 2002. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Applicant was asked to provide documentation to the panel members to demonstrate her residence in China after 1991, and was given two weeks to provide this documentation. There is no dispute that the requested documentation was delivered by hand to the IRB on February 25, 2002. [3] The IRB did not render its decision until February 18, 2003, more than one year after the conclusion of the hearing. In its decision, the IRB made a negative finding respecting the Applicant's identity, but in doing so, it is not disputed that the Applicant's requested documentation was not considered. There is no explanation on the tribunal record to account for this significant failure. [4] Counsel for the Respondent concedes that the failure of the IRB to take the evidence of identity into account would,…
Read full judgment
Zhao v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2004-02-11 Neutral citation 2004 FC 222 File numbers IMM-1685-03 Decision Content Date: 20040211 Docket: IMM-1685-03 Citation: 2004 FC 222 Toronto, Ontario, February 11th, 2004 Present: The Honourable Mr. Justice Campbell BETWEEN: JINHUA ZHAO Applicant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER [1] In the present case, the Applicant claims refugee protection on the basis of persecution on the ground of religious in the People's Republic of China. [2] The hearing before the IRB was concluded on February 14, 2002. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Applicant was asked to provide documentation to the panel members to demonstrate her residence in China after 1991, and was given two weeks to provide this documentation. There is no dispute that the requested documentation was delivered by hand to the IRB on February 25, 2002. [3] The IRB did not render its decision until February 18, 2003, more than one year after the conclusion of the hearing. In its decision, the IRB made a negative finding respecting the Applicant's identity, but in doing so, it is not disputed that the Applicant's requested documentation was not considered. There is no explanation on the tribunal record to account for this significant failure. [4] Counsel for the Respondent concedes that the failure of the IRB to take the evidence of identity into account would, in most cases, constitute a denial of natural justice that would warrant setting aside the decision. I find that this is such a case. ORDER Accordingly, I set aside the IRB's decision and refer the matter to a differently constituted panel for redetermination. "Douglas R. Campbell" J.F.C. FEDERAL COURT NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: IMM-1685-03 STYLE OF CAUSE: JINHUA ZHAO Applicant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO DATE OF HEARING: FEBRUARY 11, 2004 REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER BY : CAMPBELL J. DATED: FEBRUARY 11, 2004 APPEARANCES: Ms. Nancy Myles Elliott FOR APPLICANT Mr. David Tyndale FOR RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Nancy Myles Elliott Barrister and Solicitor Markham, Ontario FOR APPLICANT Morris Rosenberg Deputy Attorney General of Canada Toronto, Ontario FOR RESPONDENT FEDERAL COURT TRIAL DIVISION Date: 20040211 Docket: IMM-1685-03 BETWEEN: JINHUA ZHAO Applicant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
Source: decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca