Sinnathampy v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
Court headnote
Sinnathampy v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2002-04-02 Neutral citation 2002 FCT 359 File numbers IMM-3678-01 Decision Content Date: 20020402 Docket: IMM-3678-01 Neutral citation: 2002 FCT 359 Between: SINNATHAMPY, Sinniah THARMAKUNALOOSHANA, Tharmalingam Plaintiff - and - THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Defendant REASONS FOR ORDER (Filed pursuant to s. 51 of the Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7) PINARD J. [1] The application for judicial review is from a decision by the Refugee Division on July 4, 2001 that the plaintiffs are not Convention refugees as defined in s. 2(1) of the Immigration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-2. [2] Although duly notified Marc Chénard, counsel for the plaintiffs, did not appear at the hearing of this case at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, March 27, 2002. I asked the Court Registrar to contact his office to see why he was absent. The Registrar reported that she spoke to Mr. Chénard, who said his absence was due simply to an oversight. When informed of these facts counsel for the defendant objected to any adjournment, saying she was ready to proceed. In the circumstances, I decided to hear the case ex parte. [3] After reviewing the matter and hearing counsel for the defendant I have been able to conclude that the plaintiffs, whose credibility is in question, have not been able to establish any error in the decision a quo which could warrant this Court's intervention. [4] Conseque…
Read full judgment
Sinnathampy v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2002-04-02 Neutral citation 2002 FCT 359 File numbers IMM-3678-01 Decision Content Date: 20020402 Docket: IMM-3678-01 Neutral citation: 2002 FCT 359 Between: SINNATHAMPY, Sinniah THARMAKUNALOOSHANA, Tharmalingam Plaintiff - and - THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Defendant REASONS FOR ORDER (Filed pursuant to s. 51 of the Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7) PINARD J. [1] The application for judicial review is from a decision by the Refugee Division on July 4, 2001 that the plaintiffs are not Convention refugees as defined in s. 2(1) of the Immigration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-2. [2] Although duly notified Marc Chénard, counsel for the plaintiffs, did not appear at the hearing of this case at 9:30 a.m. on Wednesday, March 27, 2002. I asked the Court Registrar to contact his office to see why he was absent. The Registrar reported that she spoke to Mr. Chénard, who said his absence was due simply to an oversight. When informed of these facts counsel for the defendant objected to any adjournment, saying she was ready to proceed. In the circumstances, I decided to hear the case ex parte. [3] After reviewing the matter and hearing counsel for the defendant I have been able to conclude that the plaintiffs, whose credibility is in question, have not been able to establish any error in the decision a quo which could warrant this Court's intervention. [4] Consequently, I have dismissed the application for judicial review. YVON PINARD JUDGE OTTAWA, ONTARIO April 2, 2002 Certified true translation Suzanne M. Gauthier, C. Tr., LL.L. FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA TRIAL DIVISION NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD COURT No.: IMM-3678-01 STYLE OF CAUSE: SINNIAH SINNATHAMPY et al. v. THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION PLACE OF HEARING: MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC DATE OF HEARING: MARCH 27, 2002 REASONS FOR ORDER BY: PINARD J. DATED: APRIL 2, 2002 APPEARANCES: NO ONE FOR THE PLAINTIFF CAROLINE DOYON FOR THE DEFENDANT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: MARC CHÉNARD FOR THE PLAINTIFF MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC MORRIS ROSENBERG FOR THE DEFENDANT DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA
Source: decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca