CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
Immigration Practice |
Sinnathamby v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
IMM-2589-04
2005 FC 188, Mactavish J.
7/2/05
8 pp.
Judicial review of Immigration and Refugee Board, Refugee Protection Division decision dismissing applicant's refugee claim ([2003] R.P.D.D. No. 642 (QL))--Presiding member rendered oral decision, but when tape recording of reasons lost, reconstructed oral reasons in written decision based on notes, recollection--Tape subsequently found--Applicant arguing material differences between oral, written reasons-- Court not accepting respondent's argument written reasons should be disregarded as presiding member functus officio once oral reasons rendered--Functus officio if nothing to be completed once decision rendered--Here, Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, s. 169(d), Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, s. 61(2) requiring written reasons when refugee claim rejected--Presiding member thus not functus officio--Where significant, substantial differences between oral, written reasons for rejecting claim, decision will be set aside--Here, substantial differences exist--Such differences making it impossible to know, with certainty, why applicant's refugee claim rejected--Application allowed-- Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27, s. 169(d)--Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, SOR/2002-227, s. 61(2).