Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Tam
Court headnote
Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Tam Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2001-06-29 Neutral citation 2001 FCT 728 File numbers T-1266-98 Decision Content Date: 20010629 Docket: T-1266-98 Neutral Citation: 2001 FCT 728 BETWEEN: MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Applicant - and - SUI YUM TAM Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER HENEGHAN J. [1] The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration appeals from the decision of Citizenship Judge J.M. Hong dated April 22, 1998. In this decision, the Citizenship Judge approved the Respondent's Application for Canadian Citizenship. [2] The Respondent, although served with a Notice of Hearing, did not appear upon the hearing of this appeal. [3] The Applicant argues that the Citizenship erred in law in his determination that the Respondent had satisfied the residence requirement pursuant to section 5(1)(c) of the Citizenship Act, 1974-75-76, c. 108. The Citizenship Judge purported to apply the test established by Associate Chief Justice in Re Papadogiorgakis, [1978] 2 F.C. 208 (T.D.). [4] The Respondent arrived in Canada on October 23, 1992. Although he was absent from Canada for a total number of 419 days during the four years immediately preceding his application for citizenship, the Citizenship Judge concluded that the Respondent had demonstrated that he had established a residential base in Canada and a centralized mode of living on October 23, 1992. [5] The Applicant argues that this conclusion is pate…
Read full judgment
Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Tam Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2001-06-29 Neutral citation 2001 FCT 728 File numbers T-1266-98 Decision Content Date: 20010629 Docket: T-1266-98 Neutral Citation: 2001 FCT 728 BETWEEN: MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Applicant - and - SUI YUM TAM Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER HENEGHAN J. [1] The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration appeals from the decision of Citizenship Judge J.M. Hong dated April 22, 1998. In this decision, the Citizenship Judge approved the Respondent's Application for Canadian Citizenship. [2] The Respondent, although served with a Notice of Hearing, did not appear upon the hearing of this appeal. [3] The Applicant argues that the Citizenship erred in law in his determination that the Respondent had satisfied the residence requirement pursuant to section 5(1)(c) of the Citizenship Act, 1974-75-76, c. 108. The Citizenship Judge purported to apply the test established by Associate Chief Justice in Re Papadogiorgakis, [1978] 2 F.C. 208 (T.D.). [4] The Respondent arrived in Canada on October 23, 1992. Although he was absent from Canada for a total number of 419 days during the four years immediately preceding his application for citizenship, the Citizenship Judge concluded that the Respondent had demonstrated that he had established a residential base in Canada and a centralized mode of living on October 23, 1992. [5] The Applicant argues that this conclusion is patently unreasonable having regard to the fact that the Respondent had only arrived in Canada on October 23, 1992. [6] I agree. [7] The appeal is allowed and the decision of the Citizenship Judge dated April 22, 1998 is quashed. ORDER The appeal is allowed and the decision of the Citizenship Judge dated April 22, 1998 is quashed. "E. Heneghan" J.F.C.C. OTTAWA, Ontario June 29, 2001
Source: decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca