Date: 20000616
Docket: IMM-3037-00
BETWEEN:
RYSZARD FRANKOWSKI
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
BLAIS J.
[1] I have heard this motion for a stay on an urgent basis by teleconference and in presence of counsel for the applicant in Ottawa, on June 16, 2000, at 1:30 p.m.
[2] To succeed, the plaintiff must demonstrate that he meets the tripartite test; a serious issue to be tried, an irreparable harm for the applicant if deported, and balance of convenience in his favour.
[3] In my view, the applicant failed to convince me that he would suffer irreparable harm if he is deported to Poland.
[4] The applicant had to demonstrate that he will face a serious likelihood of jeopardy to his life or safety, but failed to do so.
[5] If deported, the applicant argued that he will face hard time, since he does not speak the language and does not know the country. I understand that his wife will follow him, so they will both face the same hardship.
[6] I also understand that his mother is living in a home for seniors in Canada and will suffer from his absence.
[7] McKeown J. said in Duvé v. Canada (M.C.I.)1:
| I agree with Simpson J. when she interprets irreparable harm in Calderon v. Canada (Minster of Citizenship and Immigration) (1995), 92 F.T.R. 107 (F.C.T.D.), as follows: |
| In Kerrut v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1992), 53 F.T.R. 93 (F.C.T.D.), Mr. Justice MacKay concluded that, for the purposes of a stay application, irreparable harm implies the serious likelihood of jeopardy to the applicant"s life or safety. This is a very strict test and I accept its premise that irreparable harm must be very grave and more than the unfortunate hardship associated with the breakup or relocation of a family. |
[8] For these reasons, it is not necessary to address the other two elements of the tripartite test.
[9] The motion for a stay is dismissed.
Pierre Blais
Judge
OTTAWA, ONTARIO
June 16, 2000
__________________