Date: 20100915

Docket: IMM-5229-10

Citation: 2010 FC 922

[ENGLISH TRANSLATION]

Ottawa, Ontario, September 15, 2010

PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Shore

BETWEEN:

Carlos Alberto SALAZAR CASTANO

Applicant

and

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

AND IMMIGRATION

Respondent

REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER

• [1] An abuse of process represents not only a breach toward the country’s judicial system, but also toward the country’s legislative and executive branches given the laws passed by the legislative body and the power given to the executive branch to make decisions in accordance with the authority that comes from its own jurisdiction considering the separation of powers.

• [2] Federal Court case law has consistently held that the Minister of Immigration has no obligation to defer a removal to allow a decision to be made on a humanitarian and compassionate application.

Considering that it has been consistently held by judges of this Court that there is no obligation upon the respondent to consider a Humanitarian and Compassionate Application prior to removing a person unlawfully in Canada, and that such an application, in and of itself, does not operate to bar his or her removal from Canada (see for example Cuff v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (December 1, 1999), IMM-5680-99);

…

Considering, in all the circumstances, that public interest requires that the Deportation Order be executed as soon as reasonably practicable (section 48 of the Immigration Act);

The requested stay is denied and the motion is dismissed.

(Mortimore v. MCI), IMM-3143-00, June 21, 2000 (Pinard J.); also: Raza v. MSPPC, IMM-6554-05, November 7, 2005 at pages 2 and 3; Cortes v. MSPPC, 2006 FC 934 at paragraph 4; Adomako v. MSPPC, 2006 FC 1100 at paragraph 16; Wraich v. MSPPC, IMM-6194-06, November 30, 2006; Sanchez v. MSPPC, IMM-503-07, February 8, 2007; Javier v. MSPPC, 2007 FC 445 at paragraph 11; Duran v. MSPPC, 2007 FC 738; Simoes v. MCI, [2000] F.C.J. No. 936; Bader v. MCI, [2002] F.C.J. No. 408; Pavalaki v. MCI, [1998] F.C.J. No. 338; Davis v. MCI, [2000] F.C.J. No. 1628; Maharaj v. MCI, [2001] F.C.J. No. 786).

• [3] Following the motion for a stay heard by Justice Yvon Pinard two days ago, on September 13, 2010, and for which a decision was issued, this second motion for a stay before the Court demonstrates a flagrant abuse of process.

ORDER

THE COURT ORDERS that, given that the lateness of this second last-minute motion in this case is clearly a flagrant abuse of process, the Court will not hear the motion.

“Michel M.J. Shore”

FEDERAL COURT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:  IMM-5229-10

STYLE OF CAUSE:  Carlos Alberto SALAZAR CASTANO

  v THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

  AND IMMIGRATION

PLACE:  Ottawa, Ontario

DATE OF MOTION

IN WRITING:  September 15, 2010

REASONS FOR ORDER

AND ORDER BY:  SHORE J.

DATED:  September 15, 2010

SOLICITORS OF RECORD: