Tai c. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2011 FC 248 (2011)

Extrait

---

Tai c. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2011 FC 248 (2011)

Federal Court - Tai v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

Source: http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/en/2011/2011fc248/2011fc248.html Federal Court

Cour fédérale

Date: 20110301

Docket: IMM-196-10

Citation: 2011 FC 248

Vancouver, British Columbia , March 1, 2011

PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Shore

BETWEEN:

TING-HSIANG TAI,

TSAI-HUEI CHANG,

WEI-HSUAN TAI, AND

LIN TAI

Applicants

and

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

AND IMMIGRATION

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT

I. Overview

[1] The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act , SC 2001, c 27 (IRPA) defines the residency obligation for permanent residents. Under section 28, subject to defined exceptions, permanent residents are required to be physically present in Canada for 730 days in every five-year period in order to retain their permanent resident status.

II. Introduction

[2] The Applicant, Mr. Ting-Hsiang Tai, his wife, Ms. Tsai-Huei Chang, and their two daughters, Wei-Hsuan and Lin, are citizens of Taiwan . They became permanent residents of Canada in 2001 but did not move to or reside in Canada .

[3] In April 2008, when the Tai family members sought to enter Canada , they were issued removal orders for failing to comply with their residency obligation. Ms. Chang and their daughters remained in Canada . Mr. Tai returned to his job in Taiwan and did not move to Canada until one year later at the end of April 2009.

[4] At their Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) hearing the Tai family members admitted that they had failed to meet their residency obligation and asked that their appeals be allowed based on the IAD’s discretionary jurisdiction.

[5] The Tai family argues that the IAD was unfair because they were not given enough hearing time to allow them to call the two immigration officers as witnesses. This allegation is without merit.

[6] The...

Voir le contenu complet de ce document

---