Sithamparapillai v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2003 FC 1460

Date: 20031212

Docket:IMM-9092-03

IMM-9622-03

Citation: 2003 FC 1460

Ottawa, Ontario, this 12^th day of December, 2003

Present: The Honourable Mr. Justice von Finckenstein

BETWEEN:

                                                  RAJENDRA SITHAMPARAPILLAI

                                                                                                                                                       Applicant

                                                                                 and

                             THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

                                                                                                                                                   Respondent

                                                            REASONS FOR ORDER

von FINCKENSTEIN J.

[1]                 The applicant is a 72 year-old man from Sri Lanka. He has made two refugee and two Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA) applications in Canada, all of which have been refused. He now seeks a stay of his removal order pending the outcome of an application for leave to seek judicial review of the second PRRA refusal. Two motions were filed (IMM-9092-03 and IMM-9622-03) which, by consent of the parties, are treated as one. The Applicant also withdrew an application for a stay pending the outcome of his leave application for the first PRRA decision (IMM-9511-03)

[2]                 The tripartite test for the granting of a stay was set out in Toth v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration) (1988), 86 N.R. 302 (F.C.A.). In order to succeed, the applicant must establish that (1) there is a serious issue to be tried with regards to the underlying matter, (2) he will suffer irreparable harm if the stay is not granted and (3) the balance of convenience favors the granting of the stay. The test is conjunctive; if the applicant fails to meet one part of the test, his motion cannot succeed.

[3]                 With regards to the second part of the test, irreparable harm, the applicant argues that he will face a significant risk of extortion in Sri Lanka as an elderly returnee. He also argues that he will be denied the timely opportunity to undergo surgery for a cataract condition.

[4]                 The applicant has failed to provide this Court with any evidence that he will face a greater risk of extortion or other mistreatment in Sri Lanka than that which other citizens experience. Moreover, while his surgery will likely be delayed, undisputed evidence was presented to the court that such surgery is available in Sri Lanka. As a result, he has failed to establish that he faces irreparable harm if the removal order is executed against him.

[5]                 In light of my findings with regards to irreparable harm, there is no need for me to consider the other parts of the Toth test.

                                                                            ORDER

This application is dismissed.

"K. von Finckenstein"

                                                                                                                                                           JUDGE                       

                                                                 FEDERAL COURT

                              NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                                                                     IMM-9622-03 and IMM-9092-03

STYLE OF CAUSE:                                                                  RAJENDRA SITHAMPARAPILLAI

                                                                                                       and

                                                                                                       THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

PLACE OF HEARING:                                                             HEARD BY WAY OF TELECONFERENCE

DATE OF HEARING:                                                               DECEMBER 10, 2003

REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER :                          von FINCKENSTEIN J.

DATED:                                                                                       DECEMBER 12, 2003

APPEARANCES:

Micheal Crane                                                                               FOR APPLICANT

Gordon Lee                                                                                     FOR RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Micheal Crane

Toronto, Ontario                                                                            FOR APPLICANT

Morris Rosenberg                                                                           FOR RESPONDENT

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Ottawa, Ontario