Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

Ou v. Canada ( Minister of Citizenship and Immigration )

IMM-5559-97

McGillis J.

18/2/99

7 pp.

Judicial review of Immigration and Refugee Board's decision applicant abandoned Convention refugee claim-Applicant personally delivering letter to Board indicating desire to delay hearing date in order to retain counsel-When Board employee attempting to reach applicant at telephone number given to advise him required to attend conference with Board members in person, informed "no such person" at that number-Board deciding applicant had abandoned Convention refugee claim-Application for leave to bring judicial review application granted-Applicant filing supplementary affidavit from landlord's daughter, Cui Ling Chen, affirming she had received telephone call from immigration official, but as unaware of applicant's name, or that he had given parents' telephone number to Board, believed it was wrong number-Whether Chen affidavit relevant, admissible on review of Board's decision-Application allowed-Obiter dicta comments of Strayer J. in Gill v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1993] F.C.J. No. 1152 (T.D.) acknowledging applicant could tender fresh evidence on judicial review application in attempt to justify absence from Board hearing compelling, particulary as finding of abandonment precluding consideration of Convention refugee claim on merits-Chen affidavit admissible on application for judicial review-Highly relevant in that demonstrating board relied on erroneous information in making decision on question of abandonment, namely that applicant had provided wrong telephone number to Board-Cases establishing evidence not considered by Board at hearing irrelevant, inadmissible on application for judicial review distinguishable as dealing with situations where Board analyzing evidence, conducting hearing of claim on merits-In present case Board only considering question of abandonment-In interests of justice for Board to consider evidence on new abandonment hearing in order to determine whether applicant justifying failure to attend conference.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.