Chen v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
Court headnote
Chen v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2004-08-09 Neutral citation 2004 FC 1095 File numbers IMM-5895-03 Decision Content Date: 20040809 Docket: IMM-5895-03 Citation: 2004 FC 1095 Ottawa, Ontario, August 9, 2004 Present: The Honourable Madam Justice Danièle Tremblay-Lamer BETWEEN: ZHUO CHI CHEN Applicant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER [1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Board (the "Board"), wherein it was determined that the applicant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection. [2] The applicant is a Chinese citizen. He claims to have a well-founded fear of persecution based on his practice of the Tian Dao religion. [3] The Board rejected the applicant's claim that he was a member of the Tian Dao faith based on the following findings: - the applicant did not understand basic aspects of the Tian Dao religion; - he gave a convoluted explanation about how he received his identification card; - it was implausible that he could obtain a genuine identity card without detection from the authorities; and - he could not respond when asked why the documentary evidence did not indicate that Tian Dao followers were mistreated. [4] The applicable standard of review when the Board's findings of fact and of credibility are in question is that of paten…
Read full judgment
Chen v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2004-08-09 Neutral citation 2004 FC 1095 File numbers IMM-5895-03 Decision Content Date: 20040809 Docket: IMM-5895-03 Citation: 2004 FC 1095 Ottawa, Ontario, August 9, 2004 Present: The Honourable Madam Justice Danièle Tremblay-Lamer BETWEEN: ZHUO CHI CHEN Applicant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER [1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Board (the "Board"), wherein it was determined that the applicant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection. [2] The applicant is a Chinese citizen. He claims to have a well-founded fear of persecution based on his practice of the Tian Dao religion. [3] The Board rejected the applicant's claim that he was a member of the Tian Dao faith based on the following findings: - the applicant did not understand basic aspects of the Tian Dao religion; - he gave a convoluted explanation about how he received his identification card; - it was implausible that he could obtain a genuine identity card without detection from the authorities; and - he could not respond when asked why the documentary evidence did not indicate that Tian Dao followers were mistreated. [4] The applicable standard of review when the Board's findings of fact and of credibility are in question is that of patent unreasonableness (Aguebor v. M.E.I. (1993), 160 N.R. 315 (F.C.A.)). [5] Despite able arguments by counsel for the applicant, I have not been convinced that there is any basis for the Court to interfere with the credibility and plausibility findings of the Board in the present case. The findings are based on evidence and the Board has given reasons in clear and unmistakable terms. This in itself is sufficient to dismiss the application for judicial review. Nevertheless, I would also add that I am satisfied that it was reasonably open to the Board to infer from the silence of the documentary evidence that members of the Tian Dao religion, on the balance of probabilities, are not persecuted in China. [6] Although I recognize that there was a document indicating that data concerning arrests are rarely released by the Chinese government, the Board was entitled to rely on a report stating that a Human Rights Watch official had no knowledge of any mistreatment of Tian Dao practitioners in China in coming to its conclusions. [7] For these reasons, the application for judicial review is dismissed. ORDER THIS COURT ORDERS THAT the application for judicial review be dismissed. "Danièle Tremblay-Lamer" J.F.C. FEDERAL COURT NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: IMM-5895-03 STYLE OF CAUSE: ZHUO CHI CHEN v. MCI PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario DATE OF HEARING: August 5, 2004 REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDEROF THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE DANIÈLE TREMBLAY-LAMER DATED: August 9, 2004 APPEARANCES: Mr. Shelley Levive FOR THE APPLICANT Ms. Negar Hashemi FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Mr. Shelley Levine Levine & Associates Barristers & Solicitors 10 King Street East Suite 1400 Toronto, Ontario M5C 1C3 FOR THE APPLICANT Mr. Morris Rosenberg Deputy Attorney General of Canada Toronto, Ontario FOR THE RESPONDENT
Source: decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca