BARRISTERS AND SOLICITORS |
Aseervatham v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
IMM-1091-99
Dubé J.
1/6/00
12 pp.
Application for judicial review of Immigration Board, Refugee Division decision ordering plaintiff's application for refugee status be heard on March 22, 1999 despite fact counsel for plaintiff, Joseph Allen, not available on that date --Hearing took place as scheduled, Allen's fellow lawyer representing applicant--Issue whether decision infringed rule of law or natural justice--Plaintiff maintained members of tribunal committed breach of rules of natural justice by refusing him right to counsel of his choice when they peremptorily set date of March 22, 1999, though fully aware Allen not available on that date--Refugee Division did not infringe rule of law or natural justice in setting date for hearing plaintiff's application--Clearly made efforts to prepare hearing roll that would correspond to availabilities supplied by Allen as far as possible--Latter chose to be replaced by counsel from law firm at hearing in question--No obligation to comply with requirements of counsel--Claimant has right to select counsel of choice--If counsel he chooses not able to appear because too busy or for other reasons, cannot expect tribunal to adjust to requirements of that counsel--Application dismissed.