Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

[2018] 1 F.C.R. F-7

Citizenship and Immigration

Immigration Practice

Summons — Judicial review of decision by Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) compelling applicant to testify at hearing before IAD — Applicant citizen of China, becoming permanent resident in 2006 — Canada Border Services Agency issuing inadmissibility report under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27, s. 44(1) alleging applicant working for foreign intelligence, security agencies — Immigration Division (ID) concluding applicant not inadmissible — On appeal before IAD, applicant declining to testify — IAD concluding having authority to compel applicant to testify pursuant to Act, s. 174(2), Immigration Appeal Division Rules, SOR/2002-230, r. 38 — Summoning applicant to appear, testify — Applicant contending right to liberty under Charter, s. 7 engaged — Whether application for judicial review premature as IAD decision interlocutory — Applicant relying on decision in Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v. Kahlon, 2005 FC 1000, [2006] 3 F.C.R. 493 (Kahlon) wherein Federal Court holding that damage to privacy of witness constituting special circumstances warranting Court’s intervention on interlocutory decision to issue summons — Application premature — Kahlon distinguishable from present case — Scope of permissible “exceptional circumstances”, i.e. situations requiring immediate review of decision despite its interlocutory nature, extremely narrowed since C.B. Powell Limited v. Canada (Border Services Agency), 2010 FCA 61, [2011] 2 F.C.R. 332 — Applicant having already testified before ID, communicating details of his life, alleged involvement with foreign agencies — Not fundamentally unfair to applicant not to decide issue of his compellability at this stage of IAD’s proceedings — Circumstances herein not warranting exception to general rule — Application dismissed.

Wang v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) (IMM-5055-16, 2017 FC 690, Roussel J., judgment dated July 17, 2017, 10 pp.)

 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.