Date: 20000427
Docket: IMM-1450-00
BETWEEN:
CECILIA ARABA YAMOAH
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
LEMIEUX J.:
[1] These written reasons confirm those I rendered orally on March 23, 2000, refusing to stay the execution of a removal order scheduled for that same day at 5:30 p.m.
[2] The applicant arrived in Canada from Ghana on August 22, 1990 and made a refugee claim which was dismissed on September 8, 1992, because she was not credible. An exclusion order was issued against her that same day. On November 16, 1992, she was granted a stay pending the disposition of her application for leave to commence judicial review proceedings from the Refugee Division's decision not to recognize her as a Convention refugee. On January 23, 1993, the applicant's application for leave was dismissed by a judge of this Court.
[3] On February 13, 1994, she married Mr. Emmanuel Smith, also born in Ghana, who obtained refugee status in 1987 and became a landed immigrant in December 1992. On July 17, 1995, their daughter was born. The applicant says she is living with her husband and daughter and their daughter is attending kindergarten in Toronto. She deposed in her affidavit that her husband Emmanuel Smith has already filed a spousal sponsorship with Immigration Canada. At the hearing, it was conceded that this sponsorship application was only made in late February 2000.
[4] On March 21, 2000, an application for leave and for judicial review was filed in this Court. The applicant seeks to commence an application for judicial review of "the decision of the Citizenship and Immigration Canada, dated on March 9th, 2000 and communicated to the applicant on or about March 14th 2000 wherein it was a removal order for the applicant to leave Canada from Pearson International Airport on March 23, 2000 at 5:30 p.m.". The removal of the applicant was said to be contrary to the best interests of the applicant's child who is a Canadian citizen.
[5] But for the lack of a serious issue, I would have granted a stay because I was convinced the applicant would suffer irreparable harm and the balance of convenience favoured her.
[6] However, the applicant could not make out a serious issue in this case. In Cuff v. Canada (M.C.I.), [1999] F.C.J. No. 1865, I had an opportunity to review this Court's jurisprudence where it has been consistently held that, in and of itself without more, an outstanding application for exemption, based on humanitarian and compassionate grounds, from the requirement that an applicant for permanent residence be processed outside of Canada, is not a ground for granting a stay. This is not a case where the respondent has unduly delayed the processing of the H & C application.
[7] For those reasons, I dismissed the stay application. There was no basis upon which I could intervene. However, I suggested to counsel for the respondent that, in the circumstances of this case, the respondent take a hard look at the decision taken to remove to Ghana, the mother of a five year old child, married to a Canadian landed resident who had the right to sponsor his spouse. Counsel for the respondent assured me that he would do so.
"François Lemieux"
J U D G E
OTTAWA, ONTARIO
APRIL 27, 2000
Email this Content