Sebastiampillai v. Canada ( Minister of Employment and Immigration )
IMM-866-94
Reed J.
5/12/94
4 pp.
Judicial review of CRDD decision based upon Immigration Act, s. 69.1(10.1)(a)-S. 69.1(10.1)(a) stating when two-member panel reaching split decision as to whether person Convention refugee, negative decision shall prevail if both panel members satisfied reasonable grounds to believe person, without valid reason, destroying or disposing of identity documents in person's possession-Applicant using fraudulent passport, giving it to unknown agent in New York according to instructions-Panel members reaching opposite conclusions as to whether applicant Convention refugee, but agreeing facts within s. 69.1(10.1)(a)-Panel never informing applicant considering applying s. 69.1(10.1)(a)-Application allowed-Just as panel must give refugee claimant notice of intention to consider whether viable internal flight alternative in home country, similar procedure should be followed when contemplating application of s. 69.1(10.1)(a)-Severe consequences of such finding as applicant will be returned to country where one panel member of view facing serious possibility of persecution-Applicant entitled to opportunity to adduce evidence or make representations before s. 69.1(10.1)(a) decision made-S. 69.1(10.1)(a) encompassing both genuine and fraudulent identity documents-Panel's decision quashed and claim in entirety referred back for reconsideration-S. 69.1(10.1)(a) finding not severable from refugee status decision-Immigration Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-2, s. 69.1(10.1)(a) (as enacted by R.S.C., 1985 (4th Supp.), c. 28, s. 18; as am. by S.C. 1992, c. 49, s. 60).