Docket: IMM-2329-18
Citation: 2019 FC 974
Ottawa, Ontario, July 23, 2019
PRESENT: Mr. Justice Norris
| BETWEEN:
|
| SAMSON BABAFEMI BABAJIDE,
MODUPE ADETEJU BABAJIDE,
BABATOPE OLADIPUPO BABAJIDE AND
OLUWATOMIKE TEMILOLUWA BABAJIDE
|
| Applicants
|
| and
|
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
|
| Respondent
|
JUDGMENT AND REASONS
[1]
Mr. Samson Babafemi Babajide, his spouse and their dependent children are citizens of Nigeria. In April 2012, Mr. Babajide applied on his own behalf and on behalf of his immediate family for Canadian permanent residence under the Quebec Investor Immigrant Program. He submitted all the required documents and fees. He responded to all requests for further information or documents in a timely way. In June 2014, he transferred $220,000 to the Government of Quebec as required under the program.
[2]
Despite repeated requests for a decision on the application, no decision was forthcoming. Eventually, in May 2018, the applicants brought an application for a writ of mandamus to compel the Immigration Section at the High Commission of Canada in Accra, Ghana, to complete the processing of their application for permanent residence. The applicants also sought related declaratory orders as well as costs.
[3]
Leave to proceed with the application was granted in September 2018.
[4]
The application was heard on December 19, 2018, and judgment was reserved.
[5]
The evidence before the Court at the time of the hearing of the application was that the applicants’ application for permanent residence “may be put into processing in 2019 depending on the Embassy’s future target for Quebec economic investor applications.”
[6]
In response to a recent inquiry from the Court, counsel for the parties have confirmed that not only have the applications been processed, the applications were successful and the applicants have all received permanent resident visas for Canada. It appears that this happened sometime in June 2019. In view of this development, counsel for the applicant acknowledges that “no decision needs to [be] rendered by the Court.”
[7]
Since the applicants have not formally withdrawn their application for mandamus and related relief, it will be disposed of by the Court on the basis that it is now moot. There is no suggestion that there are issues that should be determined by the Court notwithstanding the mootness of the application (cf. Borowski v Canada (Attorney General), [1989] 1 S.C.R. 342 at 353-63). Nor is there any suggestion that a serious question of general importance should be certified.
Email this Content