Siddiqui v. Canada ( Minister of Citizenship and Immigration )
IMM-1030-97
Hugessen J.
29/5/98
6 pp.
Application for judicial review of IRB Appeal Division quashing, for want of jurisdiction, appeal to Board against visa officer's decision refusing visa to applicant's brother as dependent child of applicant's parents who had been sponsored by applicant-Whether breach of rules of fairness because of incompetence of applicant's representative at hearing of motion to quash before Board-Submission based on Shirwa v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1994] 2 F.C. 51 (T.D.)-Considerable doubt as to applicability of Shirwa on general basis as very exceptional case where degree of professional competence very high-Application dismissed-Not necessary to reach issue as to whether degree of incompetence in representation by counsel so high as to give rise to breach of fairness on part of relevant adjudicative body-Herein, representation of applicant by her husband in fact about as much as she could have hoped for-Case for Minister on motion to quash virtually unanswerable given text of Act and Court's case law-In Yassine v. Canada (Minister of Employment & Immigration) (1994), 27 Imm. L.R. (2d) 135 (F.C.A.) Court held that, even where breach of rules of natural justice or fairness, that will not necessarily give rise to reference back to Tribunal for new hearing where outcome of such hearing foregone conclusion, as here-As result of judgments of Court of Appeal (Bailon v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1996] F.C.J. No. 386 (C.A.) (QL), and Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Lidder, [1992] 2 F.C. 621 (C.A.)), in law, Appeal Division without jurisdiction to entertain applicant's appeal and Minister's motion to quash had to be allowed.