Can. (M.C.I.) v. Rubuga, 2015 FC 1073

• Judge: Gleason, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: April 14, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: 2015 FC 1073;[2015] F.T.R. TBEd. SE.037

Can. (M.C.I.) v. Rubuga, [2015] F.T.R. TBEd. SE.037

MLB being edited

Currently being edited for F.T.R. - judgment temporarily in rough form.

[English language version follows French language version]

[La version anglaise vient à la suite de la version française]

Temp. Cite: [2015] F.T.R. TBEd. SE.037

Le Ministre de la Citoyenneté et de l'Immigration (demandeur) v. Maurice Rubuga (défendeur)

(T-1839-14; 2015 CF 1073; 2015 FC 1073)

Indexed As: Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) v. Rubuga

Federal Court

Gleason, J.

September 14, 2015.

Summary:

This was a motion for default judgment respecting a referral initiated by the plaintiff, the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, under s. 18(1)(b) of the Citizenship Act (Act). The Minister sought a declaration that the defendant had obtained his Canadian citizenship by false representation or fraud or by knowingly concealing material circumstances. Following the hearing of the motion, the Act was subject to significant amendments. Pursuant to these amendments, an order allowing the Minister's motion for default judgment would have the effect of revoking the defendant's citizenship. The pleadings entered for the present motion were not served on the defendant personally and he did not attend the hearing of his case.

The Federal Court allowed the application. The relevant provisions of s. 10.1 of the Act, recently in force, applied to the present case in accordance with s. 40(2) of the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act. The Minister had established on a balance of probabilities that the defendant obtained his Canadian citizenship by false representation and by knowingly concealing material circumstances set out in s. 35 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, such that the declaration being sought should be issued, with the effect that the defendant's Canadian citizenship was revoked. The court interpreted rules 127(2) and 147 of the Federal Courts Rules and held that the defendant had been served in due form and it was appropriate to continue in his absence. Alternatively, it was appropriate to dispense the plaintiff from his obligation to serve the statement of claim on the defendant in person (rule 211). Further, it was fair to render judgment against the defendant because he was clearly aware of the proceeding before the declaration was submitted. If it were otherwise, it would be all too easy for a defendant in a similar situation to avoid having his citizenship revoked by making himself unavailable for the purposes of the service of the pleadings. The court awarded $2,000 costs against the defendant.

Aliens - Topic 2504

Naturalization - General - Revocation (incl. loss of citizenship) - See paragraphs 1 to 110.

Aliens - Topic 2548

Naturalization - Disqualifications - Making false representation or concealing material circumstances - See paragraphs 1 to 110.

Aliens - Topic 4106

Practice - Costs - To or against Minister, Crown, Canada, etc. - See paragraph 112.

Practice - Topic 2501

Service - Personal service of writ, claim or notice - On individuals - See paragraphs 36 to 48.

Practice - Topic 2525

Service - Substituted service - When available - See paragraphs 49 to 61.

Counsel:

Anne-Renée Touchette and Ion Stancu, for the plaintiff.

Solicitors of Record:

William F. Pentney, Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Montreal, Quebec, for the defendant.

This application was heard at Montreal, Quebec, on April 14, 2015, by Gleason, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following decision at Ottawa, Ontario, on September 14, 2015.