Date: 20000201
Docket: IMM-399-00
Ottawa, Ontario, this 1st day of February 2000.
Present: The Honourable Madam Justice Dawson
BETWEEN:
VIRA CHAYKA,
LEV CHAYKA,
Applicants,
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION,
Respondent.
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] In this proceeding the applicants move for an order staying their removal from Canada pending determination of their application for leave and for judicial review of a decision of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, Convention Refugee Determination Division, that the applicants are not Convention refugees. The application was not brought within the time prescribed by subsection 82.1(3) of the Immigration Act and so they further seek an extension of time for the hearing of the applicant.
[2] At issue is whether in circumstances where an application for leave to apply for judicial review of a decision rejecting a refugee claim is made out of time subparagraph 49(1)(c)(i) of the Immigration Act applies so as to stay execution of a removal order.
[3] This issue has previously been considered by this Court in Sholev v. M.E.I., (1994) 78 F.T.R. 188 (F.C.T.D.), Ziyadah v. M.C.I. (June 8, 1999), IMM-2755-99 (F.C.T.D.) and Budoiu v. M.C.I. (November 16, 1999) IMM-5505-99 (F.C.T.D.).
[4] Having considered the matter, I make the following order:
| The motion for a stay of the removal order executable January 31, 2000 is dismissed on the ground that the removal order is stayed by operation of subparagraph 49(1)(c)(i) of the Immigration Act and, in consequence, no order of the Court is required. |
| I decline to certify a question on the ground that it has previously been held that this Court cannot, pursuant to section 83(1) of the Immigration Act, certify a serious question of general importance in connection with an application for a stay of execution of a deportation order (see: Kayumba v. Canada, (1994) 76 F.T.R. 238 and Sereno v. Solicitor General of Canada, (1993) 75 F.T.R. 71). |
___________________________
Judge
Email this Content