Date: 19990910
Docket: IMM-868-99
BETWEEN:
KANDIAH RATNASINGAM
Applicant
- and -
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
GILES, A.S.P.
[1] The Applicant by the motion before me has moved to strike out certain material filed with the Court as being part of the Record before the Visa Officer whose decision was impugned. The material was not filed before the Applicant had submitted his Record. Counsel for the Respondent minister noted that at least some of this material must have been before the Visa Officer and contacted the Visa Officer who indicated that she had not provided it originally as the Applicant had it in the Record of a prior judicial review.
[2] The Respondent"s Solicitor correctly in my view insisted that the material should have been sent and that a supplementary transmission to the Court should be made. Instead of arranging the transmission of the material from the High Commission the Visa Officer who was returning on leave brought the additional material to Toronto and handed them to the Respondent"s Counsel. The Respondent"s Counsel arranged for them to be sent to the Registry. Unfortunately the covering letter dictated by Counsel was lost and the circumstances of the late transmission were not explained until Counsel filed her own Affidavit in response to the motion now before me.
[3] Applicant"s Counsel objects to the late arrival of this material which it appeared was used on an earlier Application for a replacement Returning Residents" Permit that material it is suggested was in the hands of the Applicant from the judicial review proceedings of the earlier Application.
[4] There is no question that the argument of the Applicant"s Counsel in this review which was filed before the material surfaced was based in part on the apparent lack of evidence to support certain allegations which it now appears were based on these newly produced materials.
[5] In my view justice cannot be done if these new materials were before the Visa Officers and are not before the Court. There is in my view no point in proceeding with the judicial review without all that is relevant.
[6] I therefore intend to allow time for the filing of any Affidavit as to the provenance of the new materials and then time for service and filing of any replacement Applicant"s Record. Thereafter there will be time for filing of a replacement Respondent"s Record and still hopefully time for perusal by the Court of the material before the hearing date.
| ORDER |
The Order to strike the material submitted by the Respondent on the cover of the letter of July 26, 1999 is dismissed. The Respondent if she is so advised may file on or before the 20th of September 1999 any Affidavits as to the provenance of the material submitted with the letter of July 26, 1999. The Applicant may at any time before or on the 12th of October serve and file if so advised a replacement Applicant"s Record. The Respondent may have until the 25th of October to serve and file any replacement Respondent"s Record.
"Peter A.K. Giles"
A.S.P.
Toronto, Ontario
September 10, 1999
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
| COURT NO: IMM-868-99 |
| STYLE OF CAUSE: KANDIAH RATNASINGAM |
| - and - |
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
CONSIDERED AT TORONTO, ONTARIO PURSUANT TO RULE 369
| REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER BY: GILES A.S.P. |
DATED: FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1999
| WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY: Mr. Michael F. Battista |
For the Applicant
Ms. Marissa Beata Bielski
For the Respondent
| SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Wiseman, Battista |
Barristers & Solicitors
1033 Bay Street
Suite 308
Toronto, Ontario
M5S 3A5
| For the Applicant |
| Morris Rosenberg |
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
For the Respondent
| FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA |
Date: 19990910
Docket: IMM-8680-99
Between:
| KANDIAH RATNASINGAM |
Applicant
| - and - |
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP |
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
| REASONS FOR ORDER |
| AND ORDER |