Docket: IMM-1936-13
Citation:
2014 FC 584
Toronto, Ontario, June 19, 2014
PRESENT: The Honourable Madam Justice Simpson
|
BETWEEN:
|
|
PEDLANGE JEAN BAPTISTE
|
|
Applicant
|
|
and
|
|
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
|
|
Respondent
|
ORDER AND REASONS
(Reasons delivered
orally in Toronto on June 18, 2014)
[1]
Pursuant to subsection 7(2) of the Immigration
and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27, the Applicant has applied for
judicial review of a decision and reasons of a Senior Immigration Officer (the
Officer), refusing her application for permanent residence. The decision was
dated February 27, 2013.
I.
Background
[2]
The Applicant is a 28 year old citizen of Haiti. She left that country on July 15, 2005 and entered Canada on August 16, 2006. She
claimed refugee protection at that time but, on March 5, 2009 her refugee claim
was rejected.
[3]
The Applicant has been steadily employed in Canada since May of 2007. She also volunteers as a French tutor, assists the homeless,
assists charity fundraisers, and helps with community events. She is an active
church member, and volunteers with its youth and in its French instruction
program. She has taken courses in Canada to improve her fluency in English, as
well as computer and chemistry courses.
[4]
On January 16, 2010, five days after the
devastating earthquake in Haiti, the Applicant applied for permanent residence
on H&C grounds. On February 12, 2010, the Applicant wrote to CIC (the Letter)
and said that she had learned that one of her sisters had fled to the Dominican
Republic and that she was unable to locate her parents and her other sister.
The Letter is in the Certified Tribunal Record.
II.
The Decision
[5]
Approximately three years after the Letter, the Decision
included the following passage:
I am of the opinion that her strongest ties are
in Haiti, where her parents and her sisters live and where she grew up and
spent most of her life.
It is clear that the presence of family in Haiti was an important aspect of the Decision.
III.
The Issues
[6]
Although the Applicant has raised several
issues, the Officer’s apparent failure to consider the Letter is, in my view,
determinative.
IV.
Discussion and Conclusion
[7]
The Officer’s conclusion that the Applicant has
parents and two sisters in Haiti shows that the Letter was not considered. This
is clearly the case because the Letter made it clear that one sister had left Haiti. In my view, this makes the decision unreasonable.
V.
Certification
[8]
No question for posed for certification by
either counsel.
Email this Content