Date: 19981130
Docket: T-2656-97
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
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Appellant
- and -
YEE SHAN NG
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
BLAIS J.
[1] This is an appeal by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration from the decision of the Citizenship Judge, dated October 28, 1997 wherein the Judge approved the application of Yee Shan Ng from grant of citizenship under subsection 5(1) of the Citizenship Act.
[2] The applicant first came to Canada on May 1, 1993 and acquired the status of a permanent residence on the same day. She applied for Canadian citizenship on August 8, 1996.
[3] The decision of the Citizenship Judge says:
| |
Despite a residence shortage of 643 days, the applicant, through credible declaration of action and intent and the provision of irrefutable documentation, has, within the THURLOW FRAMEWORK, given proof of both the establishment and maintenance of a bona fide Canadian centrality of living. In the relevant period between LANDING and FIRST ABSENCE, the customary indicia were put in place: domicile, SIN, Health Insurance, bank account, family establishment in Canada. |
|
| |
Periods of absence were attributable to completion of educational programs already begun. |
|
| |
Throughout all periods of absence, ties for a Canadian pied-a-terre were fully maintained and all academic vacations were spent in Canada. |
|
| |
All outside-Canada resources/holdings were terminated appropriately and at the proper time. |
|
| |
The applicant is now duly employed in Canada in a position commensurate with his university degree. |
|
| |
All other requirements for citizenship having been met, I have, therefore, approved this application. |
|
[4] The appeal of the Minister is based on the grounds that during the four years preceding the date of application for citizenship, the respondent did not satisfy the residence requirements of paragraph 5(1)(c) of the Citizenship Act.
[5] It seems obvious that the soul reason for the applicant"s absence of Canada is to complete her university degree in Hong Kong which she had already started prior to coming to Canada.
[6] In my opinion, it seems clear from the answer to the test of residence that the applicant has centralized her mode of existence in Canada and I do not see any reason to set aside the decision that was made by the Citizenship Judge.
[7] For these reasons, the appeal is dismissed.
Pierre Blais
Judge
OTTAWA, ONTARIO
November 30, 1998
Email this Content