Ramadan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
Court headnote
Ramadan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2006-09-07 Neutral citation 2006 FC 1072 File numbers IMM-7427-05 Decision Content Date: 20060907 Docket: IMM-7427-05 Citation: 2006 FC 1072 Ottawa, Ontario, September 7, 2006 PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Phelan BETWEEN: AHMAD ABOU RAMADAN Applicant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT [1] The Applicant is a 68 year old citizen of Syria. His application for humanitarian and compassionate consideration to allow for processing of his permanent residence application from within Canada (H&C application) was denied. [2] The Applicant raised a number of issues in attacking the decision, some of which were abandoned, others of which go to the merits of the H&C application itself. This judicial review can be disposed of by reference to only one issue. [3] The Applicant says that his medical condition (he suffers from epileptic seizures) is central to his H&C. [4] The Respondent says that his medical condition was never advanced as grounds for his H&C. This would explain the notation in the interview notes “no medical problems – no medication”. It would also explain why the impact of his medical condition was never properly addressed in the H&C decision. [5] However, the Applicant has filed an affidavit in which he attests to the fact that he disclosed his medical condition, its seriousness and his absence of support…
Read full judgment
Ramadan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2006-09-07 Neutral citation 2006 FC 1072 File numbers IMM-7427-05 Decision Content Date: 20060907 Docket: IMM-7427-05 Citation: 2006 FC 1072 Ottawa, Ontario, September 7, 2006 PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Phelan BETWEEN: AHMAD ABOU RAMADAN Applicant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT [1] The Applicant is a 68 year old citizen of Syria. His application for humanitarian and compassionate consideration to allow for processing of his permanent residence application from within Canada (H&C application) was denied. [2] The Applicant raised a number of issues in attacking the decision, some of which were abandoned, others of which go to the merits of the H&C application itself. This judicial review can be disposed of by reference to only one issue. [3] The Applicant says that his medical condition (he suffers from epileptic seizures) is central to his H&C. [4] The Respondent says that his medical condition was never advanced as grounds for his H&C. This would explain the notation in the interview notes “no medical problems – no medication”. It would also explain why the impact of his medical condition was never properly addressed in the H&C decision. [5] However, the Applicant has filed an affidavit in which he attests to the fact that he disclosed his medical condition, its seriousness and his absence of support in Syria. There was no cross-examination on his affidavit. [6] While the Respondent has made submissions that this medical condition was not advanced as part of the H&C, it has produced no evidence challenging the sworn uncontradicted evidence of the Applicant. [7] There is no reason to reject the Applicant’s evidence, it has the “ring of truth”, and his medical condition is not challenged. Given the direct conflict on the grounds of the H&C, the Court cannot ignore the Applicant’s evidence. [8] Therefore, the Court must conclude that the medical condition was raised and not properly addressed in the H&C decision. [9] This application for judicial review will be granted, the decision of the immigration officer will be quashed and the matter remitted back with leave to the Applicant to file such further and better evidence and submissions as is necessary for a new H&C determination. JUDGMENT IT IS ORDERED THAT this application for judicial review is granted, the decision of the immigration officer is quashed and the matter remitted back with leave to the Applicant to file such further and better evidence and submissions as is necessary for a new H&C determination. “Michael L. Phelan” Judge FEDERAL COURT NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: IMM-7427-05 STYLE OF CAUSE: AHMAD ABOU RAMADAN and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario DATE OF HEARING: September 5, 2006 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT: Phelan J. DATED: September 7, 2006 APPEARANCES: Mr. Rocco Galati FOR THE APPLICANT Ms. Angela Marinos FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: GALATI, RODRIGUES & ASSOCIATES Barristers & Solicitors Toronto, Ontario FOR THE APPLICANT MR. JOHN H. SIMS, Q.C. Deputy Attorney General of Canada Toronto, Ontario FOR THE RESPONDENT
Source: decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca