Kaur v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2007 FC 1018

 

Date: 20071003

Docket: IMM-4349-06

Citation: 2007 FC 1018

Calgary, Alberta, October 3, 2007

PRESENT:     The Honourable Madam Justice Heneghan

 

BETWEEN:

MOHINDER KAUR

Applicant

 

 

and

 

 

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

Respondent

 

 

REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER

 

[1]               Mrs. Mohinder Kaur (the “Applicant”) seeks  a judicial  review of the decision of the Immigration and Refugee Board Refugee Protection Division (the “Board”), dated July 26, 2006.  In its decision, the Board determined that the Applicant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection within the meaning of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 (the “Act”).

[2]               The Applicant is a citizen of India.  She is a widow.  She based her claim upon a fear of persecution by reason of her membership in a particular social group, that is a woman and member of a family.  She alleged that she feared for her life at the hands of one of her sons.

 

[3]               The Board expressed concern about the Applicant’s status as a widow and characterized the Applicant’s claim that her husband committed suicide as the result of difficulties with their son Jaspal as the “most central element” of this claim.

 

[4]               According to the transcript of the evidence before the Board, the Applicant was given the opportunity to submit post hearing evidence concerning her husband’s death.  The Applicant submitted a copy of her husband’s Death Certificate on or about May, 2006, although this document is not included in the Tribunal Record.

 

[5]               The Board made no reference to the Death Certificate in its decision and proceeded to reject the Applicant’s claim on credibility grounds.

 

[6]               In my opinion, the Board committed a reviewable error by failing to address evidence that was relevant to what the Board characterized as a “central element” of the claim, that is the fact that her husband was dead.

 

[7]               In the result, the application for judicial review is allowed and the matter remitted to a differently constituted panel of the Board for re-determination.  There is no question for certification arising.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ORDER

 

     The application for judicial review is allowed and the matter remitted to a differently constituted panel for re-determination.  There is no question for certification arising.

 

 

“E. Heneghan”

FEDERAL COURT

 

SOLICITORS OF RECORD

 

 

 

DOCKET:                                          IMM-4349-06

 

STYLE OF CAUSE:                          MOHINDER KAUR v. MCI

 

 

PLACE OF HEARING:                    Calgary, Alberta

 

DATE OF HEARING:                      October 3, 2007

 

REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER: HENEGHAN J.

 

DATED:                                             October 3, 2007

 

 

 

APPEARANCES:

 

Mr. Raj Sharma	FOR THE APPLICANT
Mr. Rick Garvin	FOR THE RESPONDENT

 

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

 

Caron & Partners LLP Calgary, Alberta	FOR THE APPLICANT
John H. Sims, Q.C. Deputy Attorney General of Canada	FOR THE RESPONDENT