Vasquez v. Canada ( Minister of Citizenship and Immigration )
IMM-1979-97
Rothstein J.
26/11/96
5 pp.
Judicial review of 1997 CRDD dismissal of Convention refugee claim-In 1992 applicant found not to have credible basis for Convention refugee claim-Applicant left Canada, returned in 1994, made second claim-Entitled to make second claim under Immigration Act, s. 44(1): any person in Canada claiming to be Convention refugee may seek determination of claim by notifying immigration officer-Before CRDD applicant arguing entitled to bring forward facts, arguments relating to experiences in El Salvador prior to negative credible basis decision, including experiences engaging s. 2(3)-S. 2(3) providing person not ceasing to be Convention refugee by virtue of s. 2(2)(e) if establishing compelling reasons arising out of any previous persecution for refusing to avail self of protection of country left, or outside of which remained, by reason of fear of persecution-Some of facts, arguments applicant wished to make before credible basis tribunal, others could have been made, but were not-Prior determination by credible basis tribunal giving rise to question of res judicata-Three conditions for issue estoppel present: same question decided; decision final; same parties in both proceedings-Principle set out in Fenerty v. The City of Halifax (1920), 50 D.L.R. 435 (N.S.S.C.) applied: party, having received final decision prevented from relitigating matter notwithstanding finding supplementary arguments available at time of original litigation-Credible basis tribunal essentially finding not Convention refugee in Canada-Same issue as before CRDD in 1997-New arguments relating to s. 2(3) could have been raised before credible basis tribunal, but were not-Not proper to make them before CRDD-No special circumstances warranting introduction of evidence previously available-Immigration Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-2, ss. 2(3) (as am. by R.S.C., 1985 (4th Supp.), c. 28, s. 1), 44(1) (as am. by S.C. 1992, c. 49, s. 35).