Date: 20000825 Docket: T-2037-99
BETWEEN:
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Applicant
- and - THI NOI TRUONG
Respondent T-2038-99
BETWEEN:
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Applicant
- and - DUY TRI HUYNH
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
TEITELBAUM, J:
[1]This is an appeal by the applicant, the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (MCI), from a decision of a Citizenship Judge dated September 23, 1999.
Page: 2
[2] The Citizenship Judge allowed the application for citizenship for both respondents but states "This is very much a borderline case". The Citizenship Judge also states that "the Applicant(s) partially meet the criteria by which absences can be counted as residency as per Madam Justice Reed in re: Koo".
[3] With respect, I do not understand the meaning of "partially meet the criteria" when one is dealing with the issue of residency.
[4]It is my belief that one either does or does not meet the requirements of residency as stated in the Citizenship Act and/or as elaborated by the jurisprudence of the Federal Court.
[5] In any event, when the hearing of the appeal was called, no one appeared on behalf of the respondents.
[6]A letter dated December 31, 1999 was sent toW. Brad Hardstaff, Counsel for the Applicant, by Ann Wilson of M.J. Stall and Associates Ltd., Immigration Consultants, and which letter cannot be considered helpful for the respondents, informing the applicant "that they (respondents) are withdrawing from this process that the Federal Government has initiated".
Page: 3
[7] The respondents came to Canada on December 9, 1993 and were lawfully admitted for permanent residence in Canada on that date.
[8] The respondents submitted an application for citizenship on December 11, 1998. In the four years preceding the date of the applications for citizenship, the respondents were absent from Canada for a total of 684 days.
[9] The reason for the absences for both respondents was for the sole purpose of visiting relatives. These visits created a shortfall of 319 days of the minimum residence requirement of 1095 days.
[10]Paragraph 5(1)(c) of the Citizenship Act states:
5. (1) The Minister shall grant citizenship to any person who
5. (1) Le ministre attribue la citoyenneté à toute personne qui, à la fois
(c) has been lawfully admitted to Canada for permanent residence, has not ceased since such admission to be a permanent resident pursuant to section 24 of the Immigration Act, and has, within the four years immediately preceding the date of his application, accumulated at least three years of residence in Canada calculated in the following manner: (i)for every day during which the person was resident in Canada before his lawful admission to Canada for permanent residence the person shall be deemed to have accumulated one-half of a day of residence, and
(ii) for every day during which the person was resident in Canada after his lawful admission to Canada for permanent residence the person shall be deemed to have accumulated one day of residence;
c) a été légalement admise au Canada à titre de résident permanent, n'a pas depuis perdu ce titre en application de l'article 24 de la Loi sur l'immigration, et a, dans les quatre ans qui ont précédé la date de sa demande, résidé au Canada pendant au moins trois ans en tout, la durée de sa résidence étant calculée de la manière suivante
(i) un demi-jour pour chaque jour de résidence au Canada avant son admission à titre de résident permanent,
(ii) un jour pour chaque jour de résidence au Canada après son admission à titre de résident permanent;
Page: 4
[11]The purpose of prescribing at least three years of Canadian residence in the four
years immediately before applying for citizenship was given by Mr. Justice Muldoon in
the case of Pourghasemi (1993) 62 F.T.R. 122 at 123, paragraph 6:
So those who would throw in their lot with Canadians by becoming citizens must first throw in their lot with Canadians by residing among Canadians, in Canada, during three of the preceding four years, in order to Canadianize themselves. It is not something one can do while abroad, for Canadian life and society exist only in Canada and nowhere else.
[12]It is clear from a reading of the material placed before me that the respondents did
virtually nothing to "Canadianize" themselves. Other than getting their medicare cards and opening a bank account, they did not do anything else of any importance.
[13]In that they did not file any other material, that is, no argument as to why the Citizenship Judge was correct and did not appear to argue their case, the appeal is allowed and the decision of the Citizenship Judge dated September 23, 1999 is quashed.
"Max M. Teitelbaum"
J.F.C.C.
Calgary, Alberta August 25, 2000
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET:T-2038-99; T-2038-99
STYLE OF CAUSE:MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP & IMMIGRATION AND THI NOI TRUONG
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP & IMMIGRATION AND DUY TRI HUYNH
PLACE OF HEARING:CALGARY, ALBERTA
DATE OF HEARING:AUGUST 21, 2000
REASONS FOR ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE TEITELBUAM
| DATED: AUGUST 25, 2000 |
|
| APPEARANCES: |
|
| NO ONE APPEARED |
FOR APPLICANT |
| MS. TRACY KING |
FOR RESPONDENT |
| SOLICITORS OF RECORD: |
|
| THI NOI TRUONG |
FOR APPLICANT |
| DUY TRI HUYNH |
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA EDMONTON, ALBERTA
FOR RESPONDENT