Kaba v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Kaba v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
Court (s) Database
Federal Court Decisions
Date
2006-02-27
Neutral citation
2006 FC 259
File numbers
IMM-289-06, IMM-290-06
Decision Content
Date: 20060227 Dockets: IMM-289-06 IMM-290-06
Citation: 2006 FC 259
Montréal, Quebec, the 27th day of February 2006
PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Blais
BETWEEN:
DIENE KABA
and
FATOUMATA KABA
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
and
THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY
AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] This is an application for stay of the enforcement of a removal order against the applicant, pending a decision on two applications for judicial review (IMM-289-06 and IMM-290-06) of two decisions, one relating to a PRRA application, the other relating to an application on humanitarian grounds.
Irreparable harm
[2] Evidence supporting the application essentially relies on the same facts submitted in the claim for protection made to the Immigration and Refugee Board, which failed for lack of credibility. The applicant also submitted as evidence other elements that were the subject of analysis by the officer who made the two decisions (PRRA and HC).
[3] The Federal Court has already dismissed an application for leave and judicial review of the Board's decision.
[4] The only new contemporaneous evidence is a letter from the applicant's sister, which makes no reference to the risk of forced circumcision of the child or to spousal abuse, but refers to other family-related problems.
[5] This Court has already held in a number of other cases that neither a PRRA application nor an application for stay constitute a legitimate means of appealing a decision that has already been determined: see the decision of Mr. Justice Yves de Montigny in this regard in Joao v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2005 FC 880:
As held by this Court in a number of cases, when the applicant's account has been found not to be credible both by the Refugee Division and a PRRA officer, this same account cannot serve as a basis for an argument supporting irreparable harm in a stay application, Akyol v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2003] F.C.J. No. 1182; Saibu v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2002] F.C.J. No. 151; Hussain v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2000] F.C.J. No. 751; Ahmed v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2001] 1 F.C. 483 (T.D.).
[6] The applicant has not demonstrated that she would suffer irreparable harm if she were returned to her country of origin.
[7] The balance of convenience favours the respondent, who has the duty to execute the removal order as soon as is reasonably practicable.
[8] In the circumstances, it is not necessary to consider if there is a serious question to be tried.
[9] Accordingly, the application for stay will not be allowed.
ORDER
THE COURT ORDERS that
The application for stay for dockets IMM-289-06 and IMM-290-06 be dismissed.
"Pierre Blais"
Judge
Certified true translation
Gwen May
FEDERAL COURT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKETS: IMM-289-06 and IMM-290-06
STYLE OF CAUSE: DIENE KABA and FATOUMATA KABA
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
and
THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY
AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
Respondent
PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: February 27, 2006
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: The Honourable Mr. Justice Blais
DATED: February 27, 2006
APPEARENCES:
Johanne Doyon
FOR THE APPLICANT
Isabelle Brochu
FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Doyon & Associés
Montréal, Quebec
FOR THE APPLICANT
John H. Sims, Q.C.
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Montréal, Québec
FOR THE RESPONDENT