Ismail v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2006 FC 1126

Date: 20060920

Docket: IMM-5108-05

Citation: 2006 FC 1126

Ottawa, Ontario, September 20, 2006

PRESENT:     The Honourable Mr. Justice Phelan

BETWEEN:

WAFFA AZIZ ISMAIL

SAMIR ABDULHADI ABBAS

MURAD SAMIR ABDULHADI ABBAS

AWS SAMIR ABDULHADI ABBAS

MANAR S. ABDULHADI

Applicants

and

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

AND IMMIGRATION

Respondent

REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER

[1]               The Applicants have brought a motion under Rules 397(1) and 399(2)(a) of the Federal Courts Rules in which they point out errors in the Reasons for Judgment of a clerical nature and further seek to vary the Judgment because of a substantive matter which arose subsequent to the rendering of the Judgment.

[2]               The clerical errors in the Reasons have been corrected but they have no effect on the disposition of the judicial review.

[3]               As to the substantive matter, the Applicants say that they have now learned that it was the policy of Citizenship and Immigration Canada that copies of all documents submitted to support a visa application to the Canadian visa office in Ankara, Turkey required certification by a notary.

[4]               The Applicants argue that the translation of the Ministry of Defence pass submitted by them to the visa office was not a notarized copy, which they claim would require translation from Arabic to Turkish to English. They say that this failure to have notarized documents explains the error in translation which, in the documents submitted to the Canadian visa office in Ankara, referred to Mr. Abbas as a Brigadier General.

[5]               The matter of the government’s policy of notarized documents is not a new matter or new evidence; the issue of translation was front and centre in this judicial review. It is a new argument but is not one which could not have been discovered with due diligence. The policy was a matter of public record in existence at the time of the Applicants’ judicial review.

[6]               Had the matter of the policy been raised, I cannot see how it would have been probable that there would have been a different original order.

[7]               As indicated in the Reasons, the Court could not conclude that the new translation, which the Applicants then tried to use to establish Mr. Abbas’ lower rank of Brigadier, was conclusive as to his rank. This is so in the face of other evidence consistent with his holding the more senior rank of Brigadier-General. The issue before the Court was whether the visa officer’s decision was reasonable. The debate over which translation is correct does not assist the Applicants in showing “unreasonableness”.

[8]               In my view, there are insufficient grounds to set aside or vary the original Judgment.

[9]               The motion is dismissed.

ORDER

            IT IS ORDERED THAT this motion is dismissed.

“Michael L. Phelan”

FEDERAL COURT

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                          IMM-5108-05

STYLE OF CAUSE:                          WAFFA AZIZ ISMAIL,

                                                            SAMIR ABDULHADI ABBAS,

                                                            MURAD SAMIR ABDULHADI ABBAS,

                                                            AWS SAMIR ABDULHADI ABBAS,

                                                            MANAR S. ABDULHADI

                                                            and

                                                            THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

PLACE AND

DATE OF HEARING:                      Motion made in writing under Rules 397(1)

                                                            and 399(2)(a)

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

AND JUDGMENT:                          Phelan J.

DATED:                                             September 20, 2006

APPEARANCES:

SOLICITORS OF RECORD: