Abdule v. Canada ( Minister of Citizenship and Immigration )
T-2065-98
McGillis J.
1/10/99
13 pp.
Appeal from Citizenship Judge's decision applicant did not have adequate knowledge of Canada and responsibilities and privileges of citizenship, and refusing, under Citizenship Act, s. 15(1) to recommend favourable exercise of discretion by Minister or Governor in Council-Issue whether negative recommendation "decision" within meaning of Citizenship Act, s. 14(5)-In Act, decision to reject application not made until after Citizenship Judge has considered whether or not to recommend exercise of discretion by Minister or Governor in Council-Determination not to approve application not becoming decision until after refusal to recommend exercise of discretion-"Determination" and "decision" therefore have separate and distinct meanings in legislative scheme-For purposes of appeal under Act, "decision" intended to encompass both determination and refusal to exercise discretion-Conclusion recommendation may constitute "decision" for purposes of judicial review supported by Moumdjian v. Canada (Security Intelligence Review Committee), [1999] 4 F.C. 624 (C.A.), wherein Robertson J.A. stated case law revealing term "order or decision" having no fixed or precise meaning but, depending upon statutory context in which advisory decision made, having regard to effect of such decision on rights and liberties of those seeking judicial review-Furthermore, Citizenship Judge erred either by failing to consider medical evidence or by misapprehending it-Citizenship Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-29, ss. 14(5), 15(1).