Judgments

Decision Information

Decision Content

A-281-80
Carlos Enrique Sangueneti Toro (Applicant) v.
Minister of Employment and Immigration (Respondent)
Court of Appeal, Heald J., MacKay and Kelly D.JJ.—Toronto, October 8 and 9, 1980.
Judicial review — Immigration — Application to review decision of Immigration Appeal Board stating that applicant's declaration filed is part of its reasons — Affidavits filed as exhibits to declaration not attached to it and thus not part of reasons — No reference to affidavits in reasons — Failure by the Board to consider totality of evidence — Error of law — Application allowed — Federal Court Act, R.S.C. 1970 (2nd Supp.), c. 10, s. 28.
APPLICATION for judicial review. COUNSEL:
Nancy Goodman and Barbara Jackman for
applicant.
L. Lehmann for respondent.
SOLICITORS:
Knazan, Jackman & Goodman, Toronto, for applicant.
Deputy Attorney General of Canada for respondent.
The following are the judgment and reasons for judgment of the Court rendered in English by
HEALD J.: The reasons for judgment of the Immigration Appeal Board state that the declara tion of the applicant was filed and forms part of the reasons of the Board. However, a perusal of the declaration filed as part of the Board's reasons disclosed that none of the exhibits to that declara tion, including the affidavit of Carlos Barria (Exhibit B) and the affidavit of Julia Barria (Exhibit C), are attached and therefore do not form part of the Board's reasons. Likewise, no reference is made in the reasons of the Board to these affidavits which appear to be corroborative of the statements contained in the applicant's dec laration. It appears therefore that the Board, in making its decision has not had regard to the totality of the evidence properly before it.
It has therefore erred in law. Accordingly the section 28 application is allowed and the decision of the Immigration Appeal Board is set aside. The matter is referred back to the Board with the direction that the Board consider the totality of the evidence properly before it, that is, the examina tion under oath and the applicant's declaration together with all exhibits attached thereto.
* * *
MACKAY D.J.: I concur.
* * *
KELLY D.J.: I concur.
 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.