Date: 20051101
Docket: IMM-9044-04
Citation: 2005 FC 1480
Vancouver, British Columbia, Tuesday, the 1st day of November, 2005
Present: THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE SNIDER
BETWEEN:
KENNETH LEROY DRIESSEN
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] Mr. Kenneth Leroy Driessen, the Applicant, seeks judicial review of the decision of enforcement officer Lynn Bruyere (the "Officer"), dated September 29, 2004, wherein the Applicant was determined inadmissible to enter Canada and allowed to withdraw his application for entry.
[2] The Applicant seeks an Order:
· granting the Applicant status as a permanent resident of Canada,
· entitling the Applicant to return to Canada at the expense of the Minister (pursuant to section 52 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 ("IRPA"); and
· granting costs and damages for pain, suffering, and financial loss to the Applicant.
Preliminary Matters
(a) Proper Respondent to the application
[3] The Respondent requests that the style of cause be amended to name the Solicitor General of Canada as respondent, pursuant to the Public Service Rearrangement and Transfer of Duties Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. P-34 and Orders in Council, P.C. 2003-2059, P.C. 2003-2061 and P.C. 2003-2063. The Order will reflect this change.
(b) Application dealt with in writing
[4] Pursuant to an Order of this Court dated October 31, 2005, this matter was dealt with in writing, on the basis of the written submissions filed to date and without the appearance of parties.
Background
[5] The Applicant is a citizen of the United States who entered Canada on August 19, 2000. He applied for refugee status on April 18, 2001, which status he was denied (leave for judicial review was dismissed on April 5, 2002). After his refugee claim was denied, the Applicant applied to remain in Canada as a member of the Post Determination Refugee Claimants in Canada ("PDRCC") class. His PDRCC application was converted to and processed as a pre-removal risk assessment ("PRRA") under the IRPA. A PRRA Officer dismissed his application. The Applicant was removed from Canada on January 28, 2004.
[6] The Applicant attempted to re-enter Canada on September 29, 2004, at which point the Officer refused entry and advised the Applicant to apply at a Canadian Consulate for entry. The Officer's notes indicate that the Applicant was found inadmissible due to his criminal record in the United States. The Officer allowed the Applicant to withdraw his application to enter Canada, pursuant to subsection 42(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, SOR/2002-227 (the "Regulations").
Analysis
[7] The Applicant makes lengthy submissions challenging, inter alia, his refugee determination, the validity of Canadian and U.S. laws regarding cannabis possession, and the state of his criminal record. The Applicant has not, however, shown that the Officer erred in her assessment of the Applicant's criminal record or that the Officer erred in law by finding the Applicant inadmissible.
[8] Paragraph 36(2)(b) of the IRPA renders a foreign national inadmissible to Canada if he has been convicted of two or more offences outside of Canada which are equivalent to offences in Canada. The record that was before the Officer indicates a number of convictions in the United States that would satisfy the requirements of paragraph 36(2)(b) of the IRPA. In his Application Record, filed in connection with this application, the Applicant includes a copy of his "Michigan Criminal History Record" which lists convictions for a number of offences during the period 1978 to 1997. Further evidence before the Officer indicated that he had also been convicted of offences in April 2004.
[9] Based on the Applicant's criminal record in the United States, I can find no error in the Officer's determination. Further, because of the 2004 offences, the Applicant does not meet the requirements of paragraph 18(2)(b) as a member of a class of persons deemed to have been rehabilitated.
[10] Finally, I question whether a decision has been made that can be reviewed, given that the Applicant chose to withdraw his application, pursuant to subsection 42(1) of the Regulations.
[11] Even if I were to find that the Officer erred, the scope of relief that can be granted by this Court on application for judicial review is described in subsection 18(1). Regardless of the merits of this application, the Court can neither contemplate an award of damages nor the conferral of permanent resident status upon the Applicant.
[12] For these reasons, the application will be dismissed. The application does not raise a question of serious importance that would warrant the certification of a question.
ORDER
THIS COURT ORDERS that:
1. The style of cause is amended to name the Solicitor General of Canada as Respondent;
2. The application for judicial review is dismissed; and
3. No question of general importance is certified.
(Sgd.) "Judith A. Snider"
Judge
FEDERAL COURT
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-9044-04
STYLE OF CAUSE: KENNETH LEROY DRIESSEN
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
APPLICATION DEALT WITH IN WRITING WITHOUT APPEARANCE OF PARTIES
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER: SNIDER J.
DATED: November 1, 2005
WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS BY:
Kenneth Leroy Driessen ON HIS OWN BEHALF
Scott Nesbitt FOR RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
n/a FOR APPLICANT
John H. Sims, Q.C. FOR RESPONDENT
Deputy Attorney Genera of Canada
Ottawa, ON
Email this Content