Docket: IMM-6626-11
Citation:
2012 FC 327
[UNREVISED ENGLISH
CERTIFIED TRANSLATION]
Ottawa, Ontario, March 20, 2012
PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Harrington
BETWEEN:
|
|
YANNICK WANDJA DJEUKOUA
|
|
|
|
Applicant
|
|
and
|
|
|
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
|
|
|
|
Respondent
|
|
|
|
|
REASONS
FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1]
Ms.
Djeukoua, a citizen of Cameroon, has been living in Canada for ten
years. In 2002, the Refugee Protection
Division (RPD), of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, dismissed her
claim for refugee protection, and this Court in turn is dismissing her
application for judicial review of the RPD’s decision.
[2]
In
2003, she got married and filed an application for permanent residence in Canada in the
spouse or common-law partner class. However, the immigration officer dismissed
the application because he was of the view that Ms. Djeukoua’s marriage was one
of convenience. Her application for judicial review of that decision was also
dismissed (Djeukoua v Canada (Minister of
Citizenship and Immigration), 2006 FC 1213, [2006] FCJ No 1509 (QL)).
[3]
She
later filed an application for a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA), which was
also dismissed.
[4]
The
present matter concerns an application for judicial review of the PRRA officer’s
decision dismissing Ms. Djeukoua’s second application for permanent residence,
this time on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. She is seeking
dispensation from the requirement of filing her application from outside of Canada. The application is
based on the undue, undeserved or disproportionate hardship she would face if
she were removed to her country of origin.
[5]
In
my opinion, the PRRA officer’s decision is reasonable, and the intervention of
this Court is not warranted. The officer weighed Ms. Djeukoua’s life in Canada
with the life she would lead in Cameroon. She has established
some links to Canada, and
recently started up her own telemarketing business. However, her business
employs no one other than herself, she has no family in Canada and her
marriage is dissolved.
[6]
A
number of members of her family live in Cameroon. Her first
husband and their two children live in Gabon and
supposedly cannot return to Cameroon. In any event, that is
not a relevant factor in this case.
[7]
She
claims that she cannot be sent back to Cameroon. The claim
has no basis in law. Her refugee protection claim and her PRRA application were
both dismissed.
[8]
As
for her business, it is not a case that is similar to that in Toth v Canada (Minister of
Employment and Immigration), 86 NR 302, 11 ACWS (3d) 440, in which the
livelihoods of a number of people depended on the success of the business. At
any rate, Toth involved a motion for a stay pending a decision on an
application for judicial review in which the issues differed greatly from those
in this matter.
[9]
There
is simply no basis for the Court to intervene with respect to the decision that
is the subject of this judicial review.
ORDER
FOR THE ABOVE-NOTED REASONS;
THE COURT
ORDERS that:
1.
The
application for judicial review is dismissed.
2.
No
serious questions of general importance for certification arise from this
matter.
“Sean Harrington”
Certified
true translation
Sebastian
Desbarats, Translator
Email this Content