Date: 19980603 Docket: T-1533-97
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
YIU TUNG KU,
Appellant.
REASONS FOR ORDER (Delivered orally from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario Tuesday June 2nd, 1998)
HUGESSEN J.:
[1] This case, in my view, is at the very limits of what might be considered an acceptable compliance with the minimum residence requirements for the purposes of obtaining Canadian citizenship.
[2] The appellant came here from Hong Kong in 1993. He purchased a house in this
Page: 2 country and established his wife and two of his children there. He did not stay very long,
however, and within a matter of a couple of weeks he returned to Hong Kong. Over the next four or five years, he spent something between one half and two thirds of his time out of the country, in Hong Kong.
[3] He was retired at the time he came here, and had left behind in Hong Kong a business which he had owned there and which he had transferred to his son who lives in Hong Kong. He also established what appears to have been a subsidiary of the same business here in Canada, the business being that of sale and distribution of frames for spectacles.
[4] His frequent visits to Hong Kong were, he says, for the purposes initially of assisting his son, counselling his son in the running of the business. However, he says that is not so any longer and his son is now quite capable of running the business himself. He has no real estate in Hong Kong and when he is there, he stays with a relative, who I understood to be the brother of his daughter-in-law, a rather distant relation.
[5] The question that I have to ask myself is whether the appellant has constructively established residence in Canada, notwithstanding the length and number of his absences from the country. In my view, the case as I say is marginal, but on the balance of probabilities, I am prepared to find that given the presence in this country of his wife and two children, given the fact that the home that he has in this country is the only place in the world that can reasonably be described as being his home, and given the other rather more conventional
Page: 3 indicia of residence, he has in fact established residence in this country during the required period. The case is as I say a marginal one, and it goes only on the balance of probabilities, but they do, on balance, favour the appellant. In consequence, the appeal will be allowed.
Toronto, Ontario June 3, 1998
"James K. Hu e ~ ssen" Judge
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
COURT NO: T-1533-97
STYLE OF CAUSE: 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
YIU TUNG KU,
DATE OF HEARING: JUNE 2.1998
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO. ONTARIO
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: HUGESSEN, J.
DATED: JUNE 3, 1998
Appellant
APPEARANCES: Mr. Sheldon M. Robins
For the Appellant
Mr. Peter K. Large
Amicus Curiae
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Sheldon M. Robins
2 St. Clair Avenue East Suite 318
Toronto, Ontario M4T 2T5
For the Appellant
Peter K. Large 610-372 Bay Street Toronto, Ontario M5H 2W9
Amicus Curiae
Email this Content