Date: 20000628
Docket: IMM-3235-98
BETWEEN:
ISSAM BARAKAT
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
(order delivered orally from the bench
on June 28, 2000)
REED, J.:
I cannot conclude that there are grounds that would justify setting the decision under review aside.
The I.A.D. drew inferences, but those inferences are supported by the evidence. The I.A.D. referred to the fact that the applicant had referred to the person he was sponsoring as his "wife" on the sponsorship application, but was now claiming they were not married, only engaged. The I.A.D."s decision is based on its finding that the applicant and his father were not credible. Credibility, as we know, is the heartland of a tribunal"s function. I cannot find that those findings were perverse, capricious, or made without regard to the material before the I.A.D.
The I.A.D."s decision was addressed to whether or not it should exercise its equitable jurisdiction under paragraph 70 (1) (b) of the Immigration Act . In the course of doing so, it considered the applicant"s evidence, as well as that of his father, with respect to whether or not a misrepresentation had been made by the applicant at the port of entry. It canvassed this question, not for the purpose of assessing the validity of the deportation order (which was not challenged by the applicant before the I.A.D.), but for the purpose of assessing the applicant"s credibility and its relevance for the exercise of the Board"s equitable jurisdiction.
The statement referred to by counsel, the I.A.D."s statement that it found
as a fact that a misrepresentation had been made, must be read in the context of the I.A.D."s decision as a whole. When so read, it is clear that the I.A.D. was not making a finding with respect to the validity of the deportation order, but was making a finding of fact relevant to whether or not it should exercise its equitable jurisdiction.
The applicant had the opportunity to give evidence on and make submissions with respect to, whether or not a misrepresentation had occurred. He gave such evidence and his counsel made representations on his behalf. There was no breach of the rules of fairness.
For the reasons given, the application is dismissed.
"B. Reed"
JUDGE
Calgary, Alberta
June 28, 2000
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
Date: 20000628
Docket: IMM-3235-98
BETWEEN:
ISSAM BARAKAT
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-3235-98
| STYLE OF CAUSE: ISSAM BARAKAT v. THE MINISTER |
OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
PLACE OF HEARING: CALGARY, Alberta
DATE OF HEARING: June 28, 2000
REASONS FOR ORDER OF REED, J.
DATED: June 28, 2000
APPEARANCES:
Mr. Jehad Haymour FOR APPLICANT
Ms. Tracy King FOR RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Milner Fenerty FOR APPLICANT
Calgary, Alberta
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney
General of Canada
Ottawa, Ontario FOR RESPONDENT