Singh v. Canada ( Minister of Citizenship and Immigration )
IMM-6076-98
Tremblay-Lamer J.
19/8/99
9 pp.
Judicial review of CRDD decision applicant not Convention refugee-Applicant Sikh, citizen of India-Claiming twice arrested, released in 1995 because of political opinion-Name placed on police list after first arrest-CRDD holding if applicant to return to India, only mere possibility of persecution because not having high profile-Standard of review determined by examining four factors set out in Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (1999), 174 D.L.R. (4th) 193 (S.C.C.): (i) existence or absence of privative clause; (ii) board's expertise; (iii) purpose of Act as whole, provision in particular; (iv) nature of problem: question of fact, law-Immigration Act not containing privative clause; determination of whether applicant would face persecution if returned to India squarely within CRDD's expertise; Board's decision would not affect wide range of policies, people; determination question of fact-Standard of review patent unreasonableness-Not precluding judicial intervention where palpable error or where Board's conclusion not supported by reasonable interpretation of facts-Illogical for Board to conclude no more than mere risk of persecution, without further explanation, when documentary evidence clearly indicating list representing threat, applicant arrested twice before during period when evidence suggesting people in applicant's situation would not be at risk-CRDD either ignoring or seriously misinterpreting documentary evidence-Such palpable error rendering CRDD's decision patently unreasonable.