Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

     Date: 19990118

     Docket: IMM-219-99

BETWEEN:

JAGJIT SINGH CHANDOK


Applicant


AND:


THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

AND IMMIGRATION


Respondent


REASONS FOR ORDER

THE ASSOCIATE CHIEF JUSTICE

[1]      Mr. Chandok obtained a visitor"s visa for Canada and entered Canada on January 19, 1996 and remained in Canada after the expiration of his visa.

[2]      On March 23, 1998, the Refugee Division rejected his claim, finding he was not credible and had not proved a subjective or objective fear of persecution.

[3]      His application for leave and judicial review was dismissed.

[4]      On December 8, 1998, he was notified that his departure was scheduled for January 18, 1999.

[5]      His application for permanent residency and exemption on humanitarian grounds was denied on January 5, 1999.

[6]      On January 14, 1999, his counsel filed a notice of motion to stay his deportation, having filed an application for leave and judicial review of the Minister"s decision.

[7]      In attacking the Minister"s decision that there were not sufficient humanitarian grounds, Mr. Chandok relies on the same facts he had filed with the Refugee Division to justify his fear of persecution should he have to return to India, and he also cites the fact that his relatives reside in Canada and he has settled in Canada.

[8]      The immigration officer noted his lack of credibility, considered his employment record in Canada, and took into account Mr. Chandok"s opinion concerning the risks of return.

[9]      I am not persuaded that Mr. Chandok has raised a serious question within the meaning of the case law. The fact that other members of his family have been accepted as refugees by the Refugee Division is not indicative of an error in his case.

[10]      Nothing new is alleged by him in terms of harm. He essentially repeats the same allegations that the Refugee Division had before it. The Refugee Division ruled that his fear of persecution was not well-founded.

[11]      In these circumstances, the balance of convenience favours the application of the Act.

[12]      The application for a stay is dismissed.

                                                         John D. Richard
                                                         Associate Chief Justice

MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC

January 18, 1999

Certified true translation

Bernard Olivier

FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

TRIAL DIVISION


NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

FILE NO:                  IMM-219-998
STYLE:                  JAGJIT SINGH CHANDOK

Applicant

                     AND:
                     THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
                     AND IMMIGRATION

Respondent

PLACE OF HEARING:          Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING:          January 18, 1999

REASONS FOR ORDER BY THE ASSOCIATE CHIEF JUSTICE:

DATED:                  January 18, 1999

APPEARANCES:

Michelle Langelier              for the applicant

Josée Paquin                  for the respondent

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Michelle Langelier              for the applicant

Montréal, Quebec

Morris Rosenberg              for the respondent

Deputy Attorney General

of Canada

Federal Department

of Justice

Federal Court of Canada

     Date: 19990118

     Docket: IMM-219-99

Between:


JAGJIT SINGH CHANDOK


Applicant


AND


THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

AND IMMIGRATION


Respondent


REASONS FOR ORDER


 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.