CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
Status in Canada |
Convention Refugees |
Pariannan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
IMM-5760-01
2002 FCT 1095, Blais J.
22/10/02
13 pp.
Judicial review of Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) decision holding plaintiff not Convention refugee--Plaintiff, citizen of Malaysia, claimed refugee status, alleging valid fear of persecution on account of ethnic origin and religion-- Plaintiff minor when submitted Personal Information Form, but no longer minor when case came before members of tribunal--Principal points at issue whether IRB complied with Immigration Act and rules of natural justice with regard to assigning of representative to plaintiff (s. 69(4) providing Division to designate person to represent claimant when latter under 18 years of age), and whether IRB made error in concluding plaintiff's claim lacked credible basis--Plaintiff alleged absence of representation caused him prejudice-- Clear from hearing minutes IRB gave plaintiff opportunity to correct absence of representation--Accordingly absence of representation not prejudicial, since when time came to correct potential detriment neither he nor his counsel saw fit to do so --Additionally, Refugee Division, rule 11 requiring plaintiff's counsel to notify Division of client's minority, which he did not do--Well settled tribunal does not have to give separate reasons for conclusion credible basis lacking--Sufficient if general reasons support this conclusion, as Court confirmed in Gomez v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1999] F.C.J. No. 600 (T.D.) (QL)--Accordingly, IRB made no error on this point that would justify Court's intervention-- Application dismissed--Immigration Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-2, ss. 69(4)(as am. by R.S.C., 1985 (4th Supp.), c. 28, s. 18), 82.1(1) (as enacted idem, s. 19; S.C. 1992, c. 49, s. 73) Convention Refugee Determination Division Rules, SOR/93-45, r. 11.