Nacionales v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2017 FC 150

Date: 20170207

Docket: IMM-5357-16

Citation: 2017 FC 150

Vancouver, British Columbia, February 7, 2017

PRESENT:     The Honourable Mr. Justice Shore

ORDER AND REASONS

(Delivered orally from the Bench on February 7, 2017)

[1]               UPON the Court having received a Motion from the Applicant for a stay of removal order in regard to a removal order set for February 9, 2017;

[2]               AND UPON having read the material on file;

[3]               AND UPON having heard counsel for the respective parties at a hearing at General Sittings this day;

[4]               RECOGNIZING that the Applicant has a history of criminal convictions in Canada;

[5]               UNDERSTANDING that the criminal convictions history has culminated in the Applicant having been issued a deportation order as far back as September of 2009;

[6]               UNDERSTANDING as per the history of the Applicant in Canada, that he did have continuing criminal conviction activity for which his stay of deportation was thus set aside;

[7]               UPON the Applicant’s criminal activities subjecting the public to risk;

[8]               FURTHERMORE recognizing that no pertinent evidence demonstrates alleged mistreatment when the Applicant resided in the Philippines for a four year period after the said diagnosis of mental illness due to bipolar disorder;

[9]               RECOGNIZING that the evidence and submissions before the PRRA officer did not demonstrate cumulative discrimination which could be considered persecution to his person;

[10]           As per Ponniah v Canada (MCI) 2013 FC 386, country condition evidence of a general nature, in and of itself, cannot point to a personal threat to circumstances of an applicant;

[11]           Furthermore, without corroborative evidence of a personal risk in respect of allegations, the PRRA officer cannot be faulted for the lack of specific evidence on the part of the Applicant; the Applicant’s mental health history demonstrates that the bipolar disorder began when the Applicant was 15 years of age, and living in the Philippines;

[12]           UNDERSTANDING, that even without treatment, no manic or depressive symptoms were evident;

[13]           RECOGNIZING that according to the Applicant’s family, he was doing well and was mainly subject to sleep pattern abnormalities; the Applicant’s family in Canada preferred together with the Applicant that he not take the medication for his bipolar disorder due to skepticism of the medication regime;

[14]           As the tripartite test criteria of the Toth v Canada (MEI), (1988) 86 NR 302 (FCA) test have not been met by the Applicant for any one of the criteria, the stay of removal motion is dismissed (Direct reference is also made to the Judgment in Beaumont v Canada (MPSEP), 2007 FC 787 of Mr. Justice Michael Phelan);

ORDER

THIS COURT’S JUDGMENT is that that the stay of removal motion is dismissed.

“Michel M.J. Shore”

FEDERAL COURT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD

APPEARANCES:

SOLICITORS OF RECORD: