Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

                                                                                                                                   Date: 19980619

                                                                                                                        Docket: IMM-3119-97

Ottawa, Ontario, this 19th day of June, 1998

Present : The Honourable Mr. Justice Pinard

Between :

                                                                  MABEL OJIE

                                                                                                                                            Applicant

                                                                         - and -

                                               THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

                                                          AND IMMIGRATION

                                                                                                                                        Respondent

                                                                       ORDER

The application for judicial review of the decision of the Refugee Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board dated July 4, 1997, in which the applicant's motion to reopen her hearing was denied, is dismissed.

                                                      

   JUDGE

                                                                                                                                   Date: 19980619

                                                                                                                        Docket: IMM-3119-97

Between :


                                                                  MABEL OJIE

                                                                                                                                            Applicant

                                                                         - and -

                                               THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

                                                          AND IMMIGRATION

                                                                                                                                        Respondent

                                                        REASONS FOR ORDER

PINARD, J. :

[1]         The applicant seeks judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (the Board) dated July 4, 1997, in which the applicant's motion to reopen her hearing was denied.

[2]         In her Written Representations made prior to receiving the reasons for decision dated August 11, 1997, which were prepared by the Board member pursuant to the applicant's request for reasons, the applicant had first submitted that the Board member had erred in failing to consider the evidence which was submitted, given that he did not mention any submissions from counsel or the new evidence she intended to submit in a new hearing. The applicant now essentially argues that the Board member acted "without regard for the evidence" and exercised his discretion in breach of section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the Charter) and of the Convention Against Torture.

[3]         In Longia v. Canada (M.E.I.), [1990] 3 F.C. 288 (F.C.A.), the Federal Court of Appeal restated, at pages 293-294, that a Board may permit the rehearing of a refugee claim where the initial hearing was not held in accordance with the rules of natural justice.


[4]         In the case at bar, the Board member reviewed the new evidence and concluded that nothing in the three experts' reports indicated that she was unfit to testify at the initial hearing or that she showed signs of post-traumatic stress syndrome, as alleged in the motion. He also expressed the opinion that the applicant had not been poorly represented by her first counsel to the point where the principles of natural justice were breached. And finally, he held that the panel was not required to seek corroboration of evidence which it deemed to lack credibility. I find that each of these conclusions was reasonable, and consequently, it was open to the Board member to find that he could not allow the claim to be reopened, given that there had been no breach of the rules of natural justice. Like in Camacho-Souza v. Canada (M.E.I.) (1994), 74 F.T.R. 208, where Justice Wetston reviewed a Board's refusal of an application for rehearing based on a claim of post-traumatic stress syndrome, the Board member properly considered the new evidence, addressed the question of natural justice and the right to be heard, and assessed whether the new evidence might render the original decision a nullity. Having satisfied myself that the Board member was not influenced by irrelevant considerations and that he did not exercise his statutory discretion arbitrarily or illegally, this Court would not be justified in substituting its discretion for that of the Board member.

[5]         Under such circumstances, it is clear that the impugned decision cannot violate either section 7 of the Charter or the Convention Against Torture and, consequently, I agree with counsel for the respondent that this matter does not give rise to a question of general importance for the purpose of certification.

[6]         The application for judicial review is dismissed.

                                                    


   JUDGE

OTTAWA, ONTARIO

June 19, 1998


FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA TRIAL DIVISION

NAMES OF SOLICITORS AND SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD

COURT FILE NO.:                      IMM-3119-97

STYLE OF CAUSE:                   MABEL ORE v. MCI

PLACE OF HEARING:              MONTRÉAL

DATE OF HEARING:                 JUNE 3, 1998 REASONS FOR ORDER OF MR. JUSTICE PINARD DATED:                                                      JUNE 19, 1998

APPEARANCES

MR. MITCHELL GOLDBERG

FOR THE APPLICANT

MRS. CHRISTINE BERNARD                                             FOR THE RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD:

MITCHELL GOLDBERG

FOR THE APPLICANT

CHRISTINE BERNARD

Mr. George Thomson                                                            FOR THE 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.