Date: 19990301
Docket: T-302-98
OTTAWA, ONTARIO, THIS 1ST DAY OF MARCH, 1999.
PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CULLEN
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
Chiu Hsian Lin
Appellant
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
CULLEN J.:
[1] Given the significant financial benefit the appellant brings to Canada, one is tempted to allow the application for Canadian citizenship.
[2] However, recent decisions in the Trial Division of the Federal Court of Canada have placed a much heavier requirement vis-à-vis residence, and unhappily for the appellant he was short 907 days of the statutory requirement of 1095, or short about 80% of the requirement. It is clearly a very weak case.
[3] I can do no better than to quote the reply by the respondent Minister of Citizenship and Immigration:
In the four years preceding his application for citizenship the appellant was absent for 1158 days and had a shortfall of 907 days of the required 1095 days. Consequently, the appellant did not meet the residency requirement under s. 5(1)(c) of the Citizenship Act. In her letter of January 2, 1998 the Citizenship Judge lawfully concluded that the appellant"s absences should not count as periods of residence under the Act and that the appellant had not centralized his mode of living in Canada within the four years preceding the date of his application.
[4] I have deliberately placed heavy mention on the days outside Canada, with few redeeming factors very obviously not in evidence.
[5] The appeal is dismissed.
OTTAWA, ONTARIO B. Cullen
March 1, 1999. J.F.C.C.
Email this Content