Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

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

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.