Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content


Date: 19971211


Docket: T-2576-96

BETWEEN:

     IN THE MATTER OF THE CITIZENSHIP ACT

     R.S.C., 1985, c. C-29

     AND IN THE MATTER OF an appeal from the

     decision of a Citizenship Judge

     AND IN THE MATTER OF

     HSIU CHING LIU,

     Appellant

     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

ROULEAU, J.

[1]      This is an appeal from the decision of a Citizenship Judge who denied this appellant Canadian citizenship on November 12, 1996. It was determined that Mrs. Liu did not meet the residency requirement under paragraph 5(1)(c) of the Act which requires that an applicant for Canadian citizenship must have accumulated at least three years of residency in Canada within the four years immediately preceding his or her application. The Citizenship Judge found that the appellant had 926 days of absences in the four years preceding his Citizenship application.

[2]      The Citizenship Judge determined that the quality of the appellant's connections with Taiwan and the length of her absences from Canada showed that Canada was not where she regularly, normally and customarily lived. Pursuant to subsection 15(1), the Citizenship Judge also did not find any grounds under subsections 5(3) and 5(4) of the Act to recommend an exercise of Ministerial discretion in this appellant's case. At this hearing, the Citizenship judge also refused the appellant's husband's application for citizenship for the same reasons (T-2575-96).

[3]      In her Notice of Appeal, the appellant submits as follows:

                 The Citizenship Judge misconstrued the facts of my case, and misdirected herself with respect to the law. He ignored the law relevant to my case, and incorrectly equated physical presence with residence.                 

[4]      The appellant was born in Taiwan on February 28, 1949. She arrived in Canada on January 16, 1993 with her husband and two daughters and was landed the same day.

[5]      The appellant appeared before me at Toronto on November 18, 1997, accompanied by her husband whose testimony, it was agreed, would be applicable to both of these appeals.


[6]      For the reasons outlined in File T-2575-96, this appeal is allowed.

     JUDGE

OTTAWA, Ontario

December 11, 1997


FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA TRIAL DIVISION

NAMES OF SOLICITORS AND SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD

COURT FILE NO.: T-2576-96

STYLE OF CAUSE: Citizenship Act v. Hsiu Ching Liu

PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario

DATE OF HEARING: November 18, 1997

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROULEAU

DATED:

December 11, 1997

APPEARANCES

Mr. Sheldon M. Robins

FOR APPELLANT

Mr. Peter K. Large

FOR AMICUS CURIAE

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Sheldon M. Robins

Toronto, Ontario

FOR APPELLANT

Mr. Peter K. Large

Toronto, Ontario

FOR AMICUS CURIAE

 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.