Date: 20000718
Docket: IMM-1875-00
BETWEEN:
VLADISLAV SHTURM
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
DAWSON J.
[1] The applicant, Mr. Shturm, has moved under Rule 369 of the Federal Court Rules, 1998_, for "an extension of restoration of the status quo ante". This would require the return of Mr. Shturm to Canada. He was removed from Canada on April 13, 2000 after an Immigration Adjudicator concluded Mr. Shturm was not a bona fide visitor.
[2] Pending is an application for leave and for judicial review in respect of the Immigration Adjudicator"s decision.
[3] I am proceeding on the basis that what is sought is, in effect, an interim mandatory injunction requiring the applicant to be returned to Canada pending determination of his application for leave and for judicial review.
[4] I find that the applicant has not met the requirement that he must establish that he will suffer irreparable harm if the interim order is not granted.
[5] It is asserted in argument on the applicant"s behalf that his removal harms the applicant by seriously impeding, if not precluding, the filing of a supporting affidavit.
[6] Specifically it is submitted that:
| 13. Mr. Shturm further respectfully submits that the respondent"s precipitous removal harms him by seriously impeding, if not precluding, his filing a supporting affidavit, thereby vitiating his right to the Court rule whether those whom the respondent believes to have come into Canada in order to go to the United States are not in Canada for a temporary purpose. |
| 14. If Mr. Shturm were in Canada, he could explain through an interpreter what occurred at the inquiry " after all, until the Court grants leave, the respondent will not produce a transcript of the inquiry " his counsel can could draft an affidavit based upon that information, his interpreter could interpret its contents to him and he could notarize it without charge. |
| 15. But, when he is abroad, long-distance charges will be incurred, as well as courier expenses. In addition, the interpreter he secures abroad may charge more than the one here, and he will have to pay someone to notarize the application " and the interpreter"s statement. (The Canadian Embassy, for example, would charge him $100 to notarize his affidavit.) |
| 16. Also, the limited time-frame the Court imposes on applicants to prepare their affidavits becomes more burdensome when the applicant is abroad, rather than right at hand in Canada. |
| 17. Mr. Shturm, therefore, respectfully submits that, by deporting him before he could prepare his supporting affidavit " and fully cognizant of the pending litigation " the respondent has sought to deprive him of his legal rights and to preclude his making an effective appeal. |
[7] This does not constitute irreparable harm.
[8] In view of this conclusion, it is not necessary for me to consider whether the other elements necessary for the granting of interim mandatory injunctive relief have been made out.
[9] The motion is dismissed.
ORDER
[10] The applicant"s motion for restoration of the status quo ante is dismissed.
"Eleanor R. Dawson"
J.F.C.C.
Toronto, Ontario
July 18, 2000
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
| STYLE OF CAUSE: VLADISLAV SHTURM |
- and -
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
CONSIDERED AT TORONTO, ONTARIO, ONTARIO PURSUANT TO RULE 369
REASONS FOR ORDER AND
DATED: TUESDAY, JULY 18, 2000
| WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BY: Mr. Timothy E. Leahy, Esq. |
| SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Timothy E. Leahy, Esq. |
Barrister & Solicitor
5075 Yonge Street, Suite 408
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 6C6
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date: 20000718
Docket: IMM-1875-00
BETWEEN:
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
Email this Content