| Citation: |
Shpati v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2010 FC 367, [2010] 2 F.C.R. D-7 |
IMM-1396-10 |
Citizenship and Immigration
Exclusion and Removal
Removal of Refugees
Motion for stay of removal pending judicial review of negative pre-removal risk assessment (PRRA), application for permanent residence from within Canada on humanitarian and compassionate (H&C) grounds—Enforcement officer refusing to defer applicant’s removal pending outcome of these applications, informing applicant about right to have PRRA, permanent residence application on H&C grounds reassessed if leave granted after removal—Such statement error in law as failing to realize implications of Perez v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2009 FCA 171—Officer also failing to assess bona fides of PRRA, H&C applications, assessing risk instead, which is beyond his jurisdiction—While judicial review of negative PRRA, good faith of such proceedings not automatically resulting in stay, difficult to accept Parliament intended that it was “reasonably practicable” for enforcement officer to deprive applicant of very recourse given by Parliament—Tripartite test for granting of stay met in case at bar—Motion granted.
Shpati v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) (IMM-1396-10, 2010 FC 367, Harrington J., judgment dated April 7, 2010, 15 pp.)