Bagdassarov v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2006 FC 897

Date: 20060718

Docket: IMM-3835-06

Citation: 2006 FC 897

Montréal, Quebec, July 18^th, 2006

PRESENT:      The Honourable Mr. Justice Lemieux

BETWEEN:

VLADIMIR BAGDASSAROV

Applicant

and

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

AND IMIGRATION

and

THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY

AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

Respondents

            Motion on behalf of the applicant to obtain a stay of a Removal Order.

REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER

[1]                This stay application must be dismissed. I do not see any serious issue.

[2]                The applicant is of Russian origin and a citizen of Kazakhstan. He is twenty five years old. He came to Canada, as a minor, in 1999 with his parents who are now 64 and 67 years of age;

[3]                The family made a refugee claim which was denied in 2000;

[4]                The family made a PRAA application on December 15^th 2005 but the PRAA officer severed the applicant's PRAA from that of his parents, although common submissions were made for all of the three by an immigration consultant.

[5]                The PRAA officer rendered two decisions on April 6^th, 2006. She found the parents required Canada's protection because they were elderly, lacking family support, retired and from a village in Kazakhstan and because of these factors they would be at risk.

[6]                The PRAA officer came to a different conclusion in respect of the applicant again because of his age and the availability of state protection.

[7]                I should add the applicant's sister was recognized as a convention refugee in Canada in 1997;

[8]                I do not find any merit to the points raised by counsel for the applicant. The PRAA officer's reasons were clear, her analysis of state protection based on recent country reports from reliable sources which were not contested by the applicant.

[9]                Moreover, carefully reading both PRAA decisions as well as their negative refugee decision, the PRAA officer's finding the applicant's future risk was not similar to his parents' was reasonable based on the evidence.

[10]            In the circumstances, I need not address irreparable harm and balance of convenience.

ORDER

THIS COURT ORDERS THAT this stay application is dismissed.

"François Lemieux"

FEDERAL COURT

NAME OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                           IMM-3835-06

STYLE OF CAUSE:                           VLADIMIR BAGDASSAROV

Applicant

                                                            and

                                                            THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION ET AL

Respondents

PLACE OF HEARING:                     Montréal, Quebec

DATE OF HEARING:                       July 18, 2006

REASONS FOR ORDER:                LEMIEUX J.

DATED:                                              July 18, 2006

APPEARANCES:

SOLICITORS OF RECORD: