Ponnampalam v. Canada ( Minister of Citizenship and Immigration )
IMM-2313-95
Muldoon J.
5/9/95
7 pp.
Application to stay deportation order -- Mother and siblings of applicant granted Convention refugee status, but not applicant, whereas all faced same conditions in home country of Sri Lanka -- Mother's sponsorship of applicant operating only while applicant in school -- Applicant refused refugee status, leave to challenge decision, post-determination refugee consideration, humanitarian and compassionate assessment and leave to appeal latter assessment -- Subject to removal order, applicant applying for another humanitarian and compassionate review (final review) as provided for by removal notice -- Applicant's removal from country ending sponsorship and possibility of final review, thus constituting irreparable harm -- Timing with respect to administering final review problematic as application processed in Vegreville, Alberta; removal preceding administration of review application -- Additional problem bona fide representations of Department of Immigration to immigration bar counsel during seminars to effect more liberal and less stringent regulations regarding handling of removals for well-established persons in Canada forthcoming -- Applicant contending representations, made without duplicity, raising legitimate expectations despite fact, strict law holding no entitlement to liberal treatment pursuant to representations prior to eventuality of legislation enactments-Although preponderance of law weighing against stay of deportation order, justice considerations favouring applicant's position; common sense and justice indicating applicant should have received same favourable treatment as accorded to mother and siblings-Except with respect to representations, applicant's expectations not too high having regard to series of refusals in applications to date -- Shchelkanov v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1994), 76 F.T.R. 151 (F.C.T.D.) distinguished on basis evidence in present case establishing: (1) irreparable harm to applicant; and (2) changed conditions in Sri Lanka -- Shchelkanov incorrectly assumed to stand for proposition this Court not having jurisdiction to stay valid deportation order; rather, Shchelkanov holding: (1) not every applicant entitled to stay; and (2) entitlement to stay matter for adjudication thus invoking Court's jurisdiction -- As Court apprehending miscarriage of justice in case at bar, deportation order stayed -- Application granted.