Brannson v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, (1980) 34 N.R. 411 (FCA)

• Judge: Urie, Ryan, JJ., and Kelly, D.J.
• Court: Federal Court of Appeal (Canada)
• Case Date: June 05, 1980
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1980), 34 N.R. 411 (FCA)

Brannson v. MEI (1980), 34 N.R. 411 (FCA)

MLB headnote and full text

Brannson v. Minister of Employment and Immigration

(A-213-80)

Indexed As: Brannson v. Minister of Employment and Immigration

Federal Court of Appeal

Urie, Ryan, JJ., and Kelly, D.J.

June 5, 1980.

Summary:

This headnote contains no summary.

Aliens - Topic 1616

Exclusion and expulsion - Immigration - Deportation - Hearing - Procedure - Continuations - The Federal Court of Appeal held that a continued deportation hearing could proceed before any adjudicator whether or not the subject individual consents to the adjudicator - See paragraphs 38 to 40.

Aliens - Topic 1746

Exclusion and expulsion - Immigration - Exclusion - Particular persons - Persons convicted of a crime - Person convicted of an offence that, if committed in Canada, would constitute an indictable offence - Immigration Act, 1976-77, c. 52, s. 19(2)(a) - The applicant American was convicted in the United States of using the mails for defrauding people with a book - He was ordered to be deported from Canada under s. 19(2)(a) on the ground that his offence was one which would constitute an indictable offence in Canada - The Minister relied upon s. 339 of the Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, which established an offence of "transmitting or delivering letters or circulars" for fraudulent purposes - The adjudicator ordered the appellant to be deported on the ground that the U.S. offence was the equivalent of an offence under s. 339 of the Code - The appellant appealed - The Federal Court of Appeal allowed the appeal, set aside the deportation order and referred the matter back to an adjudicator - The Court of Appeal held that the U.S. offence was not the equivalent of an offence under s. 339, because s. 339 concerned offences only by transmitting or delivering "letters or circulars", which the U.S. offence did not concern - The Court of Appeal discussed and set out the considerations and procedure on determining whether a foreign offence was the equivalent of a Canadian indictable offence - The Court of Appeal held that on such a hearing the subject individual cannot contest his foreign conviction on its merits - See paragraphs 12 to 32 and 43 to 50.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Lavitch and Appel (1969), 69 W.W.R.(N.S.) 412, appld. [para. 25].

Button v. Minister of Manpower and Immigration, [1975] F.C. 277; 8 N.R. 545, appld. [paras. 35, 48].

Statutes Noticed:

Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 339 [para. 24].

Immigration Act, S.C. 1976-77, c. 52, sect. 19(2)(a) [para. 5]; sect. 27(2)(a) [para. 4]; sect. 46(1) [para. 39].

Immigration Regulations, 1978, sect. 35 [para. 38].

United States Code, Title 18, sect. 1341 [paras. 17, 23].

Counsel:

B. Knazan, and Miss Jackson, for the applicant;

B. Evernden, for the respondent.

This case was heard on April 24, 1980, at Toronto, Ontario, before URIE, RYAN, JJ., and KELLY, D.J., of the Federal Court of Appeal.

On June 5, 1980, the judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal was delivered and the following opinions were filed:

RYAN, J. - see paragraphs 1 to 42;

URIE, J. - see paragraphs 43 to 51.

KELLY, D.J., concurred with URIE, J.