Date: 19990930
Docket: T-56-99
BETWEEN:
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Applicant
AND
RUTH BACHO LEGASPI
Respondent
JUDGMENT AND REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
(delivered orally at Montreal, Quebec,
on September 28th, 1999)
LEMIEUX J.:
[1] This is an appeal under the Federal Court Rules (1998) by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (the Minister) from the decision of Citizenship Judge Rakovich dated November 23rd, 1998 approving the citizenship application of Ruth Bacho Legaspi, a citizen of the Phillipines, who obtained permanent residence in Canada on June 19th, 1993.
[2] The Respondent filed written representations but did not appear at the hearing.
[3] The Citizenship Judge was satisfied the Respondent met the residency requirements of paragraph 5(1)c) of the Citizenship Act (the Act) notwithstanding her lenghty absences from Canada. The Citizenship Judge found the Respondent had given proof of both the establishment and maintenance of a Canadian centrality of living.
[4] After the Respondent landed in Canada, she took up employment as a caretaker to an elderly Canadian gentleman who required constant and special care. That employment relationship lasted 5 years and 4 months; it ceased when her employer died.
[5] During her employment, the Respondent's employer spent each of the winter months in Florida (mid-November to late April). The first of such trips started November 10th, 1993, 5 months after she had landed in Canada.
[6] As a result, the Respondent, who also took short personal trips outside of Canada, was absent from Canada during the relevant period June 19th, 1993 - June 19th, 1997 for 726 days; she need to have accumulated 1,075 days; she was short 394 days, more than a year.
[7] I am of the view the Minister's appeal must be allowed. The jurisprudence of this Court is to the effect that an applicant for Canadian Citizenship must have established (emphasis added) residence in Canada before absences of a temporary nature Canada be deemed to count for residency purposes.
[8] This requirement flows from a reading of the Act, and its purpose which is to ensure that an applicant for Canadian Citizenship be in Canada and live in Canada amongst its people to know what Canada is all about. This cannot be achieved by being absent.
[9] The evidence before me is that the Respondent left Canada 5 months after been landed and was away for 6 months thereafter; this pattern continued for 5 years. The Respondent could not have established her centralized her mode of living in Canada before her absences. In addition it cannot be said her absences were of a temporary nature during the relevant period. The Citizenship Judge erred in her appreciation of the proper legal principles and in their application to the facts of this case.
[10] For these reasons, the appeal is allowed and the decision of the Citizenship Judge approving the Respondent's citizenship application is quashed.
MONTREAL, QUEBEC J. François Lemieux
September 30, 1999 Judge
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
Date: 19990930
Docket: T-56-99
BETWEEN:
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Applicant
AND
RUTH BACHO LEGASPI
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
AND JUDGMENT
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD
COURT FILE NO.: T-56-99
STYLE OF CAUSE: THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
AND
RUTH BACHO LEGASPI
PLACE OF HEARING: Montreal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: September 28, 1999
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF LEMIEUX, J.
DATED: September 30, 1999
APPEARANCES:
Ms. Lisa Maziade for the Applicant
no one appearing for the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Morris Rosenberg
Deput Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, Ontario for the Applicant
Ruth Bacho Legaspi
Montreal, Quebec for the Respondent