Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20031022

Docket: IMM-1472-03

Citation: 2003 FC 1231

Toronto, Ontario, October 22nd, 2003

Present:           The Honourable Mr. Justice Lemieux                                   

BETWEEN:

                                                                    IHSAN BABILLY

                                                                                                                                                       Applicant

                                                                                 and

                             THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

                                                                                                                                                   Respondent

                                               REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER

[1]                 The Applicant, a citizen of Syria, seeks a stay of his removal from Canada to Syria pending consideration and final determination by this Court of his application for leave and judicial review of the January 18th, 2003 decision made by the Immigration Officer Tang (the Immigration Officer) who dismissed his application for permanent residence on H & C grounds (the decision).


[2]                 The Applicant's leave application challenges the decision on the grounds the Immigration Officer erred in her consideration of the risk component of the H & C application by non-compliance with Citizenship and Immigration Canada's Manual which resulted in the Immigration Officer not referring the risk raised for evaluation by a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment Officer (PRRA Officer).

[3]                 Events have somewhat overtaken the Applicant's concerns because, concurrently with hearing of this stay motion, I heard an application by the Applicant in IMM-8077-03 for a stay of removal related to a decision of PRRA Officer Morgan dated August 8th, 2003 who had conducted a PRRA under the provisions of the new Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

[4]                 Since I am issuing a stay in respect of PRRA Officer's decision in IMM-8077-03 there may be no useful purpose in considering issuing a stay in this file because the underlying leave application may be moot. In the circumstances, this issue should be addressed by the parties on the leave application. This stay application is adjourned for that purpose.

                                                                            ORDER

THIS COURT ORDERS that this stay application is adjourned and may be brought back by the Applicant on two days notice. I remain seized of the matter.

   "François Lemieux"       

line

                                                                                                                                                               J.F.C.                          


FEDERAL COURT

                              NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                              IMM-1472-03

STYLE OF CAUSE:              IHSAN BABILLY

Applicant

and

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

Respondent

PLACE OF HEARING:                      TORONTO, ONTARIO         

DATE OF HEARING:                        OCTOBER 20, 2003   

REASONS FOR ORDER

AND ORDER BY:                               LEMIEUX J.

DATED:                                                OCTOBER 22, 2003   

APPEARANCES:                                 Ms. Robin L. Seligman

FOR APPLICANT

Ms. Leena Jaakkamainen

FOR RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:           Robin L. Seligman

Barrister & Solicitor

Toronto, Ontario

FOR APPLICANT

Morris Rosenberg

Deputy Attorney General of Canada     

FOR RESPONDENT


FEDERAL COURT

            Date: 20031022

             Docket: IMM-1472-03

BETWEEN:

IHSAN BABILLY

                                Applicant

and

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

                             Respondent

                                                           

REASONS FOR ORDER

AND ORDER

                                                           

                   


 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.