T-1842-96
IN THE MATTER OF the CITIZENSHIP ACT,
R.S.C.
1985, c. C-29
AND IN THE MATTER OF an appeal from the
decision
of a Citizenship Judge
AND IN
THE MATTER OF
Richmond
L. Estacio
Appellant
REASONS
FOR ORDER
(Delivered orally from the Bench
at Toronto, Ontario on
March 11, 1997, as edited)
McKEOWN J.
The
matter came for hearing before me in Toronto on March 11, 1997.
The
appellant appeals a decision of the Citizenship Judge dated July 15, 1996
refusing his application for citizenship on the basis that he did not meet the
requirements of residence for a Canadian citizen under paragraph 5(1)(c) of the
Citizenship Act (the Act). The issue is whether or not the appellant
satisfies the residence requirements enunciated in paragraph 5(1)(c) of the
Act.
The
appellant was born on December 13, 1968 in the Philippines. He entered Canada
as a landed immigrant on March 15, 1992. He had completed his third-year of
medical studies in the Philippines. He made inquiries at the Toronto office of
the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario and he was advised to return
to the Philippines to complete his medical degree and that it would also be
easier to do his one-year internship in the Philippines.
The
appellant returned to Canada on February 9, 1994, having completed his
fourth-year of medical studies, which was basically a year of clerkship and
then a year of internship. He has not returned to the Philippines since
February 9, 1994. He spent one week's vacation in Miami at Christmas with his
family. He resides with his family in North York. His parents are Canadian
citizens. He has two brothers and a sister who are living here in Canada: one
brother is already a Canadian citizen and the other brother has applied for
Canadian citizenship. The appellant is single.
The
appellant spends his time in Canada in three different areas: he is a member
of the Filipino-Canadian Medical Association; he works as an Amway
distributor; and he works as an extra in movies/television. The appellant has
stated that he does not intend to return to the Philippines even though he was
qualified to practise medicine there. This intention is substantiated by the
fact that for the last three years he has not returned to the Philippines even
though the opportunities for doctors from other countries are somewhat limited
in Ontario at this time.
The
appellant has centralized his mode of living in Canada and I am satisfied that
he has met the requirements of paragraph 5(1)(c) of the Act and residence in
Canada, as required thereunder. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.
_______________________________
Judge
OTTAWA, ONTARIO
April 15, 1997