Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content






Date: 20000927


Docket: IMM-5016-99



BETWEEN:

     HIKMAT MANI SHRESTHA

     Applicant


     AND


     MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

     AND IMMIGRATION

    

     Respondent



     ORDER AND REASONS FOR ORDER

NADON J.:


[1]      In view of the principles enunciated by the Federal Court of Appeal in Bazargan (1996), 205 N.R. 282, Sumaida, [2000] 3 F.C. 66 and Raimirez, [1992] 2 F.C. 306, I cannot conclude that the Refugee Board made a reviewable error, either of fact or law, when it concluded that the plaintiff was excluded by reason of article 1(F)(a) of the Refugee Convention.

[2]      At the hearing, I raised an issue as to whether the crimes committed constituted crimes against humanity. Since that issue was not raised by the parties in their memorandums, it need not be addressed.

[3]      For these reasons, this application is denied.







     Marc Nadon

     Judge

MONTREAL, QUEBEC

September 27, 2000

    

     FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

     TRIAL DIVISION



Date: 20000927


Docket: IMM-5016-99



BETWEEN:

     HIKMAT MANI SHRESTHA

     Applicant


     AND


     MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

     AND IMMIGRATION

    

     Respondent










    



     ORDER AND REASONS FOR ORDER


    


     FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

     TRIAL DIVISION

     NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD



DOCKET:      IMM-5016-99

STYLE OF CAUSE:          HIKMAT MANI SHRESTHA

     Applicant

     AND

     MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

     AND IMMIGRATION

     Respondent



PLACE OF HEARING:      MONTREAL, QUEBEC

DATE OF HEARING:      September 27, 2000

ORDER AND REASONS FOR ORDER

OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NADON

DATED:      September 27, 2000



APPEARANCES:

Odette Desjardins          for applicant

Christine Bernard          for respondent


SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Marie-José Blain          for applicant

Montreal, Quebec


Morris Rosenberg          for respondent

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.