Owusu-Baidoo v. Canada ( Secretary of State )
IMM-2627-93
Cullen J.
11/7/94
8 pp.
Application for mandamus requiring Immigration Commission to process claim for landing pursuant to Refugee Claimants Designated Class Regulations-Respondent consenting to certiorari to set aside decision applicant, citizen of Ghana, not having sufficient humanitarian and compassionate (H & C) grounds to be landed based on obvious procedural errors in first H & C review-Applicant arriving in Canada in 1988-Claim for refugee status processed pursuant to Backlog Provisions and found to have credible basis-Attending pre-landing interview on September 14, 1992, paying $350 processing fee, filing completed application for permanent residence on which indicating never convicted of offence in any country-On July 22, 1992 summarily convicted of offence of drinking and driving-When Commission learning of conviction and because of failure to disclose it on application for landing, file transferred to Criminality Review Unit for further assessment-On February 1, 1993 Immigration Act, s. 19(2)(a) amended rendering applicant inadmissible by virtue of summary conviction-S. 27 report deeming applicant criminally inadmissible for landing in Canada-After another H & C interview at which applicant informed application looking favourable, hearing officer determining would not make positive H & C determination after receiving third party information indicating applicant might have fabricated some supporting documentation-Applicant submitting legitimate expectation would be found to have credible basis and approved for landing-Further submitting had matter been handled expeditiously would not have been criminally inadmissible as summary conviction not a bar to landing under Act when application processed under Backlog provisions-Application dismissed-While may have been led to believe application would be processed according to Backlog provisions, applicant conceding Commission clear application subject to standard background checks, including security check for criminal activity-Doctrine of legitimate expectations not operating unless promise by administrative authority: Demirtas v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1993] 1 F.C. 602 (C.A.)-Even assuming promise by administrative authority, s. 109 providing new provisions of Act apply to applications pending at commencement date-Because of transfer to Criminality Unit, applicant's file incomplete and transition provisions applicable-Kanes v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), IMM-1918-93, Cullen J., judgment dated 14/12/93, not yet reported, where delay in processing final procedural step legitimate in face of otherwise complete and valid claim distinguished-Here application incomplete by virtue of false declaration made on application for landing and transfer to Criminality Unit-Matter referred back to different Immigration officer for redetermination of issue of sufficiency of H & C grounds particularly if any basis for third party allegations and their adoption by earlier officer-Immigration Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-2, ss. 19(2)(a) (as am. by S.C. 1992, c. 49, s. 11), 109.