Cruz v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
Court headnote
Cruz v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2002-06-27 Neutral citation 2002 FCT 726 File numbers IMM-2291-01 Decision Content Date: 20020627 Docket: IMM-2291-01 Neutral citation: 2002 FCT 726 BETWEEN: SALOME SINO CRUZ Applicant and MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER (Delivered orally from the Bench at Montreal, Quebec on June 27, 2002) LEMIEUX J. [1] This judicial review must be allowed because the applicant was denied procedural fairness when a visa officer with the Canadian Consulate General in New York (CCG) decided on April 27, 2001 to refuse the applicant's request for employment authorization. [2] The material part of the visa officer's letter reads: I have reviewed your application and in your case, I am not satisfied that you are a bona fide temporary worker to Canada. You failed to attend your interview scheduled on August 7, 2000, and never advised us that you had taken the steps necessary to attend a rescheduled interview. [3] The interview referred to had been scheduled for Monday, August 7, 2000. A breach of procedural fairness clearly arises because on August 2, 2000, counsel for the applicant wrote to the CCG requesting the employment authorization be issued without an interview for stated reasons or a postponement of the interview so her status could be regularized because she has no U.S. visa nor status in Canada. [4] That letter went unanswered but after prodding …
Read full judgment
Cruz v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2002-06-27 Neutral citation 2002 FCT 726 File numbers IMM-2291-01 Decision Content Date: 20020627 Docket: IMM-2291-01 Neutral citation: 2002 FCT 726 BETWEEN: SALOME SINO CRUZ Applicant and MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER (Delivered orally from the Bench at Montreal, Quebec on June 27, 2002) LEMIEUX J. [1] This judicial review must be allowed because the applicant was denied procedural fairness when a visa officer with the Canadian Consulate General in New York (CCG) decided on April 27, 2001 to refuse the applicant's request for employment authorization. [2] The material part of the visa officer's letter reads: I have reviewed your application and in your case, I am not satisfied that you are a bona fide temporary worker to Canada. You failed to attend your interview scheduled on August 7, 2000, and never advised us that you had taken the steps necessary to attend a rescheduled interview. [3] The interview referred to had been scheduled for Monday, August 7, 2000. A breach of procedural fairness clearly arises because on August 2, 2000, counsel for the applicant wrote to the CCG requesting the employment authorization be issued without an interview for stated reasons or a postponement of the interview so her status could be regularized because she has no U.S. visa nor status in Canada. [4] That letter went unanswered but after prodding by applicant's counsel, the visa officer on October 18, 2000 referring to the August 2, 2000 letter stated "I hope to be able to give you a substantive reply ... within the next two weeks". [5] Nothing happened until the April 27, 2001 refusal which I might add was on the eve of a Federal Court hearing on a mandamus application launched by the applicant. [6] In my view, in the circumstances, fairness dictated a response from CCG before making a decision. "François Lemieux" Judge Montreal, Quebec June 27, 2002 FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA TRIAL DIVISION Date: 20020627 Docket: IMM-2291-01 BETWEEN: SALOME SINO CRUZ Applicant and MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA TRIAL DIVISION NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: IMM-2291-01 STYLE OF CAUSE: SALOME SINO CRUZ Applicant and MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent PLACE OF HEARING: Montreal, Quebec DATE OF HEARING: June 27, 2002 REASONS FOR ORDER : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE LEMIEUX DATED: June 27, 2002 APPEARANCES: Ms. Vonnie E. Rochester FOR THE APPLICANT Mr. Daniel Latulippe FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Ms. Vonnie E. Rochester FOR THE APPLICANT Montreal, Quebec Morris Rosenberg FOR THE RESPONDENT Deputy Attorney General of Canada Montreal, Quebec
Source: decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca