Leung v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), docket A-283-98

Date:20000503

Docket:A-283-98

CORAM:      STONE, J.A.

         EVANS, J.A.

         MALONE, J.A.

BETWEEN:

CHI WAH ANTHONY LEUNG

     Appellant

(Applicant in the Trial Division)

     - and -

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

Respondent

(Respondent in the Trial Division)

Heard at Toronto, Ontario, Wednesday, May 3, 2000

Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario,

on Wednesday, May 3, 2000

                                        

                                    

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:              STONE J.A.

    

---

Date: 2000503

Docket: A-283-98

BETWEEN:

                                    

CHI WAH ANTHONY LEUNG

     Appellant

(Applicant in the Trial Division)

     - and -

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

Respondent

(Respondent in the Trial Division)

     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario

on Wednesday, May 3, 2000)

STONE J.A.

[1]      The appellant comes to this Court by way of an appeal from the Trial Division on the following question certified by Gibson J. pursuant to subsection 83(1) of the Immigration Act:

Is a visa officer under a duty to question the reasonableness of the Minister"s decision made pursuant to section 19(1)(c.1)(i) where on the face of the record the decision may be unreasonable?

[2]      Subparagraph 19(1)(c.1)(i) of the Act reads:

19.(1) No person shall be granted admission who is a member of any of the following classes:

...

(c.1) persons who there are reasonable grounds to believe

...

(i) have been convicted outside Canada of an offence that if committed in Canada, would constitute an offence that may be punishable under any Act of Parliament by a maximum term of imprisonment of ten years of more, or

...

except persons who have satisfied the Minister that they have rehabilitated themselves and that at least five years have elapsed since the expiration of any sentence imposed for the offence or since the commission of the act or omission, as the case may be; [Emphasis added.]

...

    

[3]      The same arguments as are advanced by the appellant here were advanced before Gibson J., who rejected them. In doing so the learned Motions Judge stated at paragraph 14 of his reasons¹:

The responsibility for being satisfied as to rehabilitation is here vested in the Minister. Her responsibility is discretionary. She need only be satisfied, but she must be satisfied for inadmissibility to be lifted. Rehabilitation involves an assessment as to future comportment based upon actions, attitudes and comportment since conviction. It is worthy of note that the responsibility for rehabilitation decisions has been vested in the Minister, not in officials such as visa officers. It was for the Minister to determine whether or not she was satisfied and the fact that the visa officer who prepared the submission to her was himself satisfied is of no consequence.

[4]      In our respectful opinion, that view is plainly dictated by the language of subparagraph 19(1)(c.1)(i), which endows the Minister with an unqualified discretion. It is not incumbent on the visa officer, therefore, to question the reasonableness of the Minister"s decision.

[5]      The appeal will therefore be dismissed for these reasons and the reasons given by Gibson J., and the certified question will be answered in the negative.

                                 "A. J. Stone"

     J.A.

              FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

     Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record

                            

DOCKET:                      A-283-98

STYLE OF CAUSE:                  CHI WAH ANTHONY LEUNG

                                 Appellant

                                 (Applicant in the Trial Division)

                         - and -

    

                         THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

                         AND IMMIGRATION

                                 Respondent

(Respondent in the Trial Division)

DATE OF HEARING:              WEDNESDAY, MAY 3, 2000

                

PLACE OF HEARING:              TORONTO, ONTARIO

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

OF THE COURT BY:              STONE J.A.

Delivered at Toronto, Ontario on Wednesday, May 3, 2000

APPEARANCES:                  Ms. Stephen Green

For the Appellant

                                    

                         Mr. Godwin Friday

                        

For the Respondent

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:          Green & Spiegel

                         Barristers & Solicitors

                         Box 114, Standard Life Centre

                         2200-121 King St. W.

                         Toronto, Ontario

                         M5H 3T9

For the Appellant

Morris Rosenberg

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

For the Respondent

                         FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

Date: 20000503

Docket: A-283-98

                        

                         BETWEEN:

CHI WAH ANTHONY LEUNG

Appellant

(Applicant in the Trial Division)

                         - and -

                         THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

                         AND IMMIGRATION

Respondent

(Respondent in the Trial Division)

                    

                     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

OF THE COURT

                    

__________________

¹The reasons below are reported at (1998), 147 F.T.R. 124.