Date: 19990902
Docket: IMM-4494-98
Between:
EROL CAVUS
Applicant
AND
THE MINISTER
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
NADON J.
1 The applicant is challenging a decision of the Refugee Division, dated August 19, 1998, which determined the applicant's claim to have been abandoned.
2 The relevant facts are very simple. The applicant is a Turkish resident of Kurdish origin. He is claiming refugee status on the ground that he fears persecution by reason of his ethnic group.
3 The applicant arrived in Canada on April 11, 1998, and claimed refugee status. He filed his Personal Information Form at the end of May 1998.
4 Soon after he arrived in Canada, he received a letter from the Refugee Division which reads as follows:
[TRANSLATION]
A senior officer of Citizenship and Immigration Canada referred your claim for refugee status to the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB).
The officer you met with gave (or sent) you a notice to appear before the Convention Refugee Determination Division. It is imperative that you attend at the date and time indicated on this notice. At that time, an interview will be held with a registry officer of the Immigration and Refugee Board to ensure that your file is complete and ready to be scheduled for hearing.
Note that if you fail to comply with this notice to appear, the Immigration and Refugee Board may, after giving you a chance to be heard, determine your claim to have been abandoned.
Sincerely . . . .
[5] According to the second paragraph of this letter, the applicant should have received a notice to appear before the Convention Refugee Determination Division from a senior officer of Citizenship and Immigration Canada. The applicant did in fact receive a notice entitled "Notice to Appear" dated April 11, 1998. According to this notice, the applicant was to appear at 9:00 a.m. on June 9, 1998 at the office of the Refugee Division located at 200 René-Lévesque Blvd. W. in Montréal. The applicant did not appear on June 9, 1998.
[6] Accordingly, the applicant received a notice to appear at a hearing on the abandonment of a refugee claim, dated July 23, 1998. This notice to appear, issued under paragraph 69.1(6)(c) of the Immigration Act and rule 32 of the Convention Refugee Determination Division Rules, directed the applicant to appear on August 19, 1998 at 8:30 to explain his failure to appear on June 9, 1998. On August 19, 1998, the applicant appeared with his counsel and following the hearing, the Refugee Division determined the applicant's claim to have been abandoned. The Refugee Division found that the explanations provided by the applicant to justify his absence on June 9, 1998 were not satisfactory.
[7] At paragraph 3 of the affidavit filed in support of the application for judicial review, the applicant states the following:
[TRANSLATION]
During an interview in her office, my lawyer explained what would happen to my file. However, I did not understand that I had to appear when the case was called. Therefore, I did not appear on June 9, 1998.
[8] Clearly, there is absolutely no basis for this statement. Because of the clarity of the letter sent to the applicant and the notice to appear dated appear dated April 11, 1998, it is difficult to comprehend the applicant's statement that he did not believe he had to appear on June 9, 1998. Accordingly, under the circumstances, the Refugee Division's finding that the explanations given by the applicant to justify his absence were inadequate is not at all unreasonable.
[9] The application for judicial review will accordingly be dismissed.
Marc Nadon
_____________________________
Judge
OTTAWA, Ontario
September 2, 1999.
Certified true translation
M. Iveson
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT NO.: IMM-4494-98
STYLE OF CAUSE: EROL CAVUS v. MCI
PLACE OF HEARING: MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC
DATE OF HEARING: August 31, 1999
REASONS FOR ORDER OF NADON J.
DATED September 2, 1999
APPEARANCES:
Michelle Langellier FOR THE APPLICANT
Montréal, Quebec
Thi My Dung Tran FOR THE RESPONDENT
Montréal, Quebec
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Michelle Langellier FOR THE APPLICANT
Montréal, Quebec
Morris Rosenberg FOR THE RESPONDENT
Deputy Attorney General of Canada