Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content





Date: 20001208


Docket: IMM-6241-00



OTTAWA, ONTARIO, THIS 8th DAY OF DECEMBER 2000

PRESENT:      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.E. DUBÉ


BETWEEN:

     LUIS EULALIO CEDENO

     Applicant

     - and -

     THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

     Respondent


     ORDER

     UPON MOTION on behalf of the applicant for a stay of execution of the deportation order made in respect of the applicant;

     AND UPON reading the material before the Court;

     AND UPON hearing counsel for the parties by telephone conference;

     THIS COURT HEREBY ORDERS THAT the application for a stay is denied.


     REASONS FOR ORDER

[1]      These last minute motions for stays on the eve of a deportation proceeding do not allow time for comprehensive reasons. Briefly, there is no serious question in the sense that the discretion that a removal officer may exercise is very limited and does not require him to undertake a substantive review of a child's best interest. In the case at bar, a Minister's delegate has declared that the applicant constitutes a danger to the public in Canada on the ground that he has been convicted of several offences including traffic in narcotics, kidnapping and assault, in total six criminal offences since 1996.

[2]      The child in question is not his own but the five-year old son of a woman with whom he has been in a common-law relationship since July 1996 and the applicant has been incarcerated since 1998 until recently. There is no allegation that the applicant would suffer irreparable harm if he is returned to the Dominican Republic. The judicial reviews which he has pending before the Federal Court may proceed in his absence. If he is successful, he will be allowed to return to this country.

[3]      The balance of convenience does not favour the applicant because the inconvenience which he may suffer as a result of his removal from Canada does not outweigh the public interest. The respondent Minister has the obligation under section 48 of the Immigration Act to execute a removal order as soon as reasonably practicable.


[4]      Consequently, this application for a stay cannot be granted.





OTTAWA, ONTARIO

December 8, 2000

    

     Judge

 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.