Date: 20100210
Docket: T-1253-09
Citation: 2010
FC 143
Calgary, Alberta, February 10, 2010
PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Campbell
BETWEEN:
MOHAMED
SAID MAHIOUT AND SADIA GUETTOUCHE
Applicants
and
MINISTER
OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1]
The present
Application is an appeal of negative citizenship decisions with respect to each
Applicant who are husband and wife and citizens of Algeria. The Applicants made separate applications
for citizenship in October 2006. Both applications were found to fail for
essentially the same reason: the couple had not established or maintained their
residence in Canada for the required 1095 days
prior to the filing date.
[2]
The
Applicants are engineers who took their professional training in Algeria. The central feature in play
in each citizenship application is that, because of Mr. Mahiout’s employment
with an international engineering firm, the couple spent a significant amount
of time on various work assignments outside of Canada during the residency period. As a result
of this factual circumstance, the Citizenship Judge correctly applied the
criteria established by the decision in Re Koo, 1993 1 FC 286. In my
opinion, in the circumstances at hand, the following two criterion required
careful consideration: does the pattern of physical presence in Canada indicate
a returning home or merely visiting the country; and what is the quality of the
connection with Canada: is it more substantial than that which exists with any
other country?
[3]
In a
citizenship decision reasons must be sufficiently clear and detailed so as to
demonstrate that all relevant facts have been considered and weighed (Canada
(Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Mahmoud, 2009 FC 57). In
addition, in the circumstances of the present case, it was necessary for the
Citizenship Judge to undertake a comparison to determine whether the
Applicants’ connection with Canada is more substantial than with Brazil, Oman,
Iran, India, and Angola (Pourzand v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) 2008 FC 395). I find
that these two imperatives were not met in the decisions under appeal. No findings supported by
critical analysis of the evidence were made by the Citizenship Judge in answer
to the two questions central to the citizenship applications (see: Tribunal
Record, p. 119 and p.119a with respect to Mr. Mahiout) (see: Tribunal Record,
p. 126 and p. 126a with respect to Ms. Guettouche).
[4]
As a
result, I find the decisions under appeal were made in reviewable error.
ORDER
THIS COURT ORDERS that each decision under appeal is
set aside and each matter is referred back for reconsideration before a
different citizenship judge.
On the present Application, I award costs in the
total amount of $1,000 to the Applicants.
“Douglas R. Campbell”
FEDERAL COURT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: T-1253-09
STYLE
OF CAUSE: MOHAMED
SAID MAHIOUT AND
SADIA
GUETTOUCHE v. MINISTER
OF
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
PLACE
OF HEARING: Calgary, Alberta
DATE
OF HEARING: February 10, 2010
REASONS
FOR ORDER
AND
ORDER: Campbell J.
DATED: February 10, 2010
APPEARANCES:
Gary
Hansen FOR
THE APPLICANTS
Richard
Garvin FOR THE
RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS
OF RECORD:
Hansen
& Company FOR
THE APPLICANTS
Calgary,
Alberta
John
H. Sims, Q.C. FOR
THE RESPONDENT
Deputy
Attorney General of Canada
Email this Content