Igal v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Igal v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
Court (s) Database
Federal Court Decisions
Date
2003-06-20
Neutral citation
2003 FCT 772
File numbers
IMM-1227-02
Decision Content
Date: 20030620
Docket: IMM-1227-02
Citation: 2003 FCT 772
Ottawa, Ontario, June 20, 2003
Present: The Honourable Madam Justice Danièle Tremblay-Lamer
BETWEEN:
ABDI MOHAMED IGAL
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] The applicant seeks judicial review of a decision of a delegate of the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration finding the applicant to be a danger to the public in Canada pursuant to subsections 53(1) and 70(5) of the Immigration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-2, (the "Immigration Act").
[2] The jurisprudence of this Court clearly supports the view that this judicial review application is moot in light of the coming into force of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 (Bouttavong v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2003] F.C.J. No. 511 (Q.L.); Macdonald v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2003] F.C.J. No. 446 (Q.L.); Allen v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (5 May 2003), IMM-2439-02 FCTD).
[3] Having determined that this application is moot, I must now decide whether I should exercise my discretion to hear this application on its merits (Borowski v. Canada (Attorney General), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 342).
[4] Contrary to the submissions of the applicant's counsel, I am of the view that the fact that the danger opinion was made pursuant to subsection 53(1) in addition to subsection 70(5) of the Immigration Act does not create a live controversy that is to be reviewed by the Court.
[5] As was determined in the above cases, I cannot find any special circumstances that would justify the use of scarce judicial resources to deal with this application on its merits.
[6] Consequently, this application for judicial review is dismissed.
[7] The applicant's counsel has proposed the following question for certification:
Is a danger finding made in compliance with the principles of natural justice, where the person concerned is mentally ill to the extent that the illness interferes with that person's ability to participate in the process?
[8] In light of the mootness of the issue, I do not find that this is an appropriate case to certify this question.
ORDER
THIS COURT ORDERS THAT:
[1] The application for judicial review is dismissed.
[2] There is no question of general importance for certification.
"Danièle Tremblay-Lamer"
J.F.C.C.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT FILE NO.: IMM-1227-02
STYLE OF CAUSE: Abdi Mohamed Igal v. M.C.I.
PLACE OF HEARING: Ottawa, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: June 9, 2003
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER: The Honourable Madam Justice Danièle
Tremblay-Lamer
DATED: June 20, 2003
APPEARANCES:
Leslie H. Morley for the Applicant
Monika Lozinska for the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Leslie H. Morley for the Applicant
Kingston, Ontario
Mr. Morris Rosenberg for the Respondent
Deputy Attorney General of Canada