Date: 20000216
Docket: IMM-949-99
Between:
ANIFAY BÉATRICE NYEMBO
Applicant
- and -
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
DUBÉ J.:
[1] The applicant is a citizen of the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Her refugee claim was rejected on January 8, 1998, but she says she was not notified until February 20, 1998. She did not submit her application for landing as a member of the post-determination refugee claimants in Canada class (PDRCC) until May 22, 1998. On February 5, 1999, the immigration officer determined her ineligible for inclusion because she had not applied within the prescribed time, or within 15 days of the day she was notified of the determination
by the Refugee Division, under paragraph 11.4(2)(b) of the Regulations. The paragraph reads as follows:
11.4(2) For the purposes of subsection 6(5) of the Act, a person whom the Refugee Division
...
(b) on or after May 1, 1997, has determined is not a Convention Refugee and who intends to apply for landing as a member of the post-determination refugee claimants in Canada class shall submit an application for a determination of whether the person is a member of that class to an immigration officer not later than 15 days after the day the person is notified of the determination by the Refugee Division.
[2] Ample authority consistently establishes that the period in question is mandatory and non-discretionary. There is no statutory enactment that would allow an immigration officer to either extend or disregard this period. Consequently, the immigration officer did not err in dismissing the applicant's application considering that the said application was not submitted within the prescribed time.
[3] As a result, this application for judicial review cannot be allowed.
[4] Considering the well established authority on this point, there is no serious question of general importance to certify under section 83(1) of the Immigration Act.
OTTAWA, Ontario
February 16, 2000
Judge
Certified true translation
Peter Douglas
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT FILE NO.: IMM-949-99
STYLE OF CAUSE: ANIFAY BÉATRICE NYEMBO AND MCI
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
DATE OF HEARING: FEBRUARY 8, 2000
REASONS FOR ORDER OF DUBE J.
DATED: FEBRUARY 16, 2000
APPEARANCES:
BENJAMIN BAJIKIJAIE FOR THE APPLICANT
IAN HICKS FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
BENJAMIN BAJIKIJAIE FOR THE APPLICANT
TORONTO
Morris Rosenberg FOR THE RESPONDENT
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Date: 20000216
Docket: IMM-949-99
OTTAWA, ONTARIO, THE 16th DAY OF FEBRUARY 2000
Present: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.E. DUBÉ
Between:
ANIFAY BÉATRICE NYEMBO
Applicant
- and -
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
ORDER
The application for judicial review is dismissed.
Judge
Certified true translation
Peter Douglas
Gill v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 1999 CarswellNat 1587; Bensalah v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 1999 CarswellNat 1586; Razavi v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 1998 CarswellNat 331, 43 Imm. L.R. (2d) 28, 144 F.T.R. 36; Adam v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 1998 CarswellNat 2714, 60 C.R.R. (2d) 354, 161 F.T.R. 42; Melinte v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 1997 CarswellNat 1135, 38 Imm. L.R. (2d) 265, 134 F.T.R. 292 and Ponnampalam v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 1996 CarswellNat 918, 34 Imm. L.R. (2d) 166, 117 F.T.R. 294.
Email this Content